Actions Speak Louder Than Words
Reiner files Criminal Complaint
Dear Friends, dear Followers, dear Readers
Reiner has been working diligently on his criminal complaint. You can hear in Reiner’s new voice note how his criminal complaint affects all humanity.
Reiner is thankful when you subscribe to his YouTube Channel Reiner Fuellmich News Network here: https://www.youtube.com/@ReinerFuellmichNewsNetwork
You can listen to Reiner’s new statement here:
The Criminal Complaint + Document
This criminal complaint is a lengthy document. Reiner wrote the criminal complaint in German and the following is a translation to English. It is possible that the page numbers do not align with the page numbers in the original document. The content list helps you navigate through the document.
We will publish the original German document in a Substack post for the German speaking audience and for the records.
Criminal complaint
against the presiding judge at the Göttingen Regional Court, Schindler, public prosecutor John and public prosecutor Recha, Lars Roggatz (Lower Saxony State Criminal Police Office), Dr. Jakob and Ms. Luther (head and deputy head of Rosdorf Prison) and Mr. Frank (head of the medical department at Rosdorf Prison), Dr. Justus Hoffmann, Antonia Fischer, and Marcel Templin (so-called "port lawyers" from Berlin)
for false accusation, deprivation of liberty, failure to render assistance, obstruction of justice in office, threat/coercion, grievous and dangerous bodily harm, perversion of justice, and all other applicable criminal offenses
to the detriment of Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, attorney Katja Wörmer, attorney Dr. Christof Miseré, and attorney Edgar Siemund
The undersigned hereby files a criminal complaint against the above-named persons for the above-mentioned criminal offenses and all other applicable offenses.
Contents
8. On the removal of Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke. 69
11. The financial collapse of the "port lawyers" by August 2022 at the latest 81
13. Regarding the embezzlement of client funds for the "class action" by the "Hafenanwälte" 88
A Summary introduction to the ongoing deprivation of liberty based on an arrest warrant of March 15, 2023, which was enforced by way of perversion of justice and is false from start to finish
I. Background to the above-mentioned criminal offences – including the ongoing detention to date on the basis of the false arrest warrant of 15 March 2023, which was enforced by way of perversion of justice is the work carried out by Dr. Reiner Fuellmich from July 10, 2020, until his abduction from Mexico on October 11, 2023, which was financed by donations and aimed at clarifying the coronavirus pandemic announced in March 2020. As part of this work, Dr. Fuellmich interviewed more than 450 scientists, medical professionals, economists, lawyers, and other expert witnesses on the following questions from the beginning of the investigative work of the Corona Committee, which he founded together with witness Viviane Fischer from Berlin, until the time of his abduction from Mexico:
1. How dangerous is the supposedly new and deadly coronavirus really? As all statistics on excess mortality show: no more dangerous than a moderate case of influenza.
2. How reliable is a PCR test in detecting infection? Not at all. That is why the PCR test is still only approved for scientific purposes and not for diagnostic purposes – as its inventor, scientist and Nobel Prize winner Kary Mullis, has repeatedly pointed out in public.
3. How dangerous are the anti-corona measures, especially the lockdowns, mask mandates, social distancing, and finally the so-called vaccinations? The lockdowns destroyed the economy. As of 2022, the so-called vaccinations have cost at least 20 million lives worldwide and caused severe adverse reactions, i.e., serious side effects, in around 2.3 billion people.
II. This work by Dr. Fuellmich, in particular the interviews conducted in German and English with, among others,
– former Pfizer Vice President Dr. Mike Yeadon
– Nobel Prize winner Prof. Luc Montagnier
– the former premier of the Canadian province of Newfoundland/Labrador, Brian Peckford
– English parliamentarian Andrew Bridgen
– pathologist Prof. Dr. Arne Burkhardt
– former US Deputy Secretary of State Catherine Austin Fitts
– the current US Secretary of Health, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
– English funeral director John O'Looney
– Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò
– German biologist Prof. Sucharit Bhakdi
– as well as Holocaust survivor Vera Sharav
led to massive positive reactions from the international public right from the start.
In particular, the legal review following the interviews and questioning as part of the so-called "Model Grand Jury Proceeding" (from late 2021 to early 2022) attracted worldwide attention and led to overwhelmingly positive reactions from millions of viewers who had previously been uncertain and, in some cases, even desperate.
Previously, in September 2020, a 50-minute video in German and English had attracted particular worldwide attention. Dr. Fuellmich had written this video to show that the PCR test had been deliberately misused by Christian Drosten, who was the most important advisor to the German federal government at the time (and who, in turn, was referred to by Anthony Fauci as a "German scientist" in order to push for the PCR test to be used in the US). This test had been deliberately misused to create "cases" for the purpose of frightening the population; cases that did not even exist in order to enforce the above-mentioned measures (lockdowns, mask mandates, so-called "vaccinations"). This video was viewed by many millions of people before it was deleted by YouTube/Google. This happened – as has since been made public in the US – under pressure from some government officials responsible for the measures in the US, particularly from the ranks of the FBI. The fact that this form of censorship was exercised by the government on Facebook and other social media in order to silence scientific opinions that deviated from the official narrative has been publicly admitted by, among others, the founder of Facebook/Meta, Mark Zuckerberg.
Christian Drosten does not have a real doctorate with a dissertation, nor does he have a real professorship with a habilitation. Dr. Fauci is, as Robert F. Kennedy Jr. proves in his 2022 bestseller "The Real Anthony Fauci," a corrupt and inhumane fraud. Fauci and Drosten were also involved in the so-called "gain of function" experiments, which were designed to make viruses deliberately dangerous to humans, as evidenced by the email correspondence between them and others that has since been made public.
III. Since August 2021, Dr. Fuellmich has been targeted for these activities.
– exposure and
– legal proceedings
the background of the so-called pandemic into the sights of state security and the Office for the Protection of the Constitution and corresponding employees of both organizations in other authorities; an assistant for state security/the Office for the Protection of the Constitution was, for example, the accused Lars Roggatz from the Lower Saxony State Criminal Police Office.
A dossier on Dr. Fuellmich (compiled by the State Security Service/Constitutional Protection Agency and the Federal Criminal Police Office) proves that Dr. Fuellmich, because of his international legal experience and successes and because of his international reach regarding the coronavirus pandemic, is being targeted by infiltrating his personal environment (namely the three accused so-called "harbor lawyers") and a compliant public prosecutor (the accused public prosecutor John, but also the accused Recha), and if necessary with the help of a legal "construction," i.e., a false accusation dressed up in legal terms, and prevented from continuing his international Corona work; above all, he was to be prevented from taking up a political office.
The public prosecutor's file, although grossly incomplete (it lacks documents relevant to the decision and, in particular, dozens of notes on telephone conversations between the accused John and, in particular, the accused complainants, the so-called "port lawyers," but also with representatives of the state security/constitutional protection authorities) shows that this was precisely what the state security/constitutional protection authorities intended to do in the further course of events:
IV. According to the public prosecutor's file, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security (no other domestic authority was informed according to the file) requested the Göttingen Public Prosecutor's Office, with the assistance of the Lower Saxony State Criminal Police Office, to initiate criminal proceedings against Dr. Fuellmich. There were no indications of any criminal offences. Therefore, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security and the Lower Saxony State Criminal Police Office repeatedly and emphatically pointed out to the Göttingen Public Prosecutor's Office that Dr. Fuellmich and the Corona Committee he heads were to be classified as part of the so-called "Querdenker" scene and that the proceedings requested by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution were based on the "corona connection" of Dr. Fuellmich's work. The whole thing was therefore – as stated in the heading of the first letter to the Göttingen public prosecutor's office dated February 15, 2022, which is included in the file – "relevant to state security."
Contrary to the expectations of the State Security/Constitutional Protection Agency, however, Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke, a law-abiding and experienced senior public prosecutor, was responsible for the proceedings against Dr. Fuellmich. She conducted very thorough preliminary investigations based on the "analysis report" provided to her by the State Security Agency. The report lists all of the Corona Committee's income and expenditure, gold purchases, loans, etc., which are already transparently disclosed in the Corona Committee's books. Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke also took a particular look at the Corona Committee's website, publications, and broadcasts. On June 14, 2022, she concluded that no criminally relevant conduct was apparent and clearly informed the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security, which was obviously pushing for the proceedings, that a public prosecutor cannot simply invent crimes out of thin air on command in order to conduct investigations and bring charges.
V. This was not the outcome desired by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution. But shortly thereafter, i.e., approximately two and a half months after the proceedings were discontinued by Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke, Dr. Fuellmich's former co-host, witness Viviane Fischer, at the request of Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, as Viviane Fischer stated in court, contacted the "port lawyers" who had been removed from the Corona Committee in August 2021 and were now working for the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security.state security. In particular, she handed over an email from Dr. Fuellmich dated August 26, 2022, in which Dr. Fuellmich stated, among other things, that he was in the process of repaying a loan that he (like Viviane Fischer) had taken out in order to temporarily secure parts of the donations from imminent seizure by the authorities from the Corona Committee's account. Constitution Protection/State Security wanted to prevent this at all costs because it saw this (the loan) as the only way to fabricate a criminal offense for the prosecution of Dr. Fuellmich. Therefore, in the opinion of the Constitution Protection/State Security, the imminent repayment of the loan had to be prevented. Accordingly, the Constitution Protection/State Security felt compelled to resort to the two emotionally unstable "port lawyers" Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, whom Viviane Fischer and Reiner Fuellmich had hired in August, and who are now being used by the state security services to intimidate and harass Dr. Fuellmich and his supporters.State Security now forced to resort to the two emotionally unstable "port lawyers" Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, who had removed Viviane Fischer and Reiner Fuellmich from the Corona Committee in August 2021 because they had shown no interest in the work of the Corona Committee and were only interested in getting their hands on the Corona Committee's donations. They resorted to them to prevent repayment of the loan by stealing the money from Dr. Fuellmich and to quickly file a criminal complaint, linked to the loan, alleging that Dr. Fuellmich had taken donations with the intention of not repaying them. The criminal complaint was drafted and filed on September 2, 2022 (less than a week after the State Security Service learned from Viviane Fischer that Dr. Fuellmich was about to repay the loan) by the "port lawyers," as requested or desired by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security Service.
It should also be noted that the accused, Antonia Fischer, has been working for the State Security Service since her legal clerkship and apparently continues to do so today.
On the same day, September 2, 2022, Viviane Fischer began a public smear campaign against Dr. Fuellmich in the Corona Committee. Together with Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, who was advising the committee, and shortly thereafter together with the "port lawyers," she knowingly falsely accused Dr. Fuellmich of being responsible, among other things, for the children of the Corona Committee's employees having to go hungry because the Corona Committee was illiquid, for which Dr. Fuellmich was responsible. Finally, she had become so caught up in the smear campaign that she formally called for a hunt for Dr. Fuellmich with an explicit "Halali."
She prevented Dr. Fuellmich from participating in the decisive broadcast on September 2, 2022, which set the entire smear campaign in motion, by falsely claiming to him that the broadcast would be canceled that day because the wife of the Corona Committee's manager, Corvin Rabenstein, was having her second child.
However, the second proceedings, which were initiated on September 2, 2022 (i.e., on the day Viviane Fischer and the "port lawyers" launched their smear campaign against Dr. Fuellmich), were once again brought before the competent senior public prosecutor Reinecke, who had refused to initiate criminal investigations against Dr. Fuellmich on June 14, 2022, after extensive preliminary investigations. had refused to initiate criminal investigations against Dr. Fuellmich after extensive preliminary investigations. Since, prima facie, nothing had obviously changed in the facts of the case since June 14, 2022, she ordered the resubmission of the case file she had set aside on June 14, 2022—obviously to examine whether there were now new facts that would justify the initiation of criminal proceedings. In the further course of her investigation, she must have realized that the criminal complaint filed by Justus Hoffmann, who is severely mentally ill, contained blatantly false allegations, for example, Dr. Fuellmich had threatened people, including Justus Hoffmann, because of their "ethnic origin" with a Winchester , a rifle whose production had been discontinued at the end of the 19th century.
Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke would also have rejected this second attempt to remove Dr. Fuellmich from circulation by dismissing the case if the case had not been taken away from her by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security by interposing the accused John and transferring him from Hanover to Göttingen. She would have done what a police investigator named Spörhase, who had apparently become suspicious because of the content of the criminal complaint, had noted in his file, namely to question the complainants, but also Viviane Fischer as a witness. However, it is almost certain that she would also have questioned Dr. Fuellmich as a defendant—as is required by law—in order to hear his side of the story in accordance with the principle of audiatur et altera pars, and not just that of the obviously seriously disturbed complainants.
However, in order to prevent precisely this, because it would have led to a renewed dismissal or refusal of criminal investigations, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security had the young, inexperienced, compliant prosecutor on probation, the defendant John, transferred from Hanover to Göttingen and assigned him to the case – with a new investigation file number (the old one was changed for this very reason).
Contrary to the file note made by the investigating officer Spörhase, the accused John did not conduct any investigations prior to Dr. Fuellmich's abduction from Mexico on October 11, 2023, but limited himself to having the Corona Committee's accounts, which had already been evaluated, re-evaluated, with the same result: Absolutely nothing had been concealed; all income and expenses, all loans, gold purchases, etc. were reported in the Corona Committee's books – at least until Viviane Fischer suddenly fired accountant Jens Kuhn in August 2022, again in massive violation of company law. After that, there were no longer any accounting records, but this did not interest the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security, as their only goal was to bring Dr. Fuellmich down and Viviane Fischer (whether knowingly or unknowingly/under orders is unclear) was working for the Office for the Protection of the Constitution.
VI. The accused John was informed by the so-called "Hafenanwälte" (harbor lawyers) about all the movements of Dr. Fuellmich, who was staying with his wife at friends' homes in Mexico, as well as about the progress of alleged settlement talks between Dr. Fuellmich and the "Hafenanwälte." This was because in March 2023, the "port lawyers" had approached Dr. Fuellmich via Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab, whom Dr. Fuellmich trusted, in order to pretend that they wanted to settle the existing "differences" over the money stolen from Dr. Fuellmich by way of a settlement. In fact, however, the "port lawyers" conducted these settlement talks with Dr. Fuellmich on behalf of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security only as a pretense in order to determine his whereabouts and have him kidnapped in Mexico with the help of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security and its auxiliary officers, such as the defendant Lars Roggatz.
The background to the alleged settlement talks is that, immediately after the criminal complaint was filed on September 2, 2022, the "port lawyers," with the knowledge and intent of the accused John and the accused Roggatz, who coordinates the work of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security, prevented Dr. Fuellmich from repaying the loan by not only withholding the money intended for the loan repayment but also almost all other financial assets of the Dr. Fuellmich family amounting to more than €10 million. Fuellmich by not only taking the money intended for the loan repayment, but also almost all of the Dr. Fuellmich family's other financial assets amounting to more than 1.158 million euros (and approximately 400,000 euros in client funds). Prosecutor John kept the "port lawyers" informed of this on an ongoing basis. He protected these crimes because the "port lawyers" were acting on behalf of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security, which was also controlled by prosecutor John.
VII. In close cooperation and consultation with the "harbor lawyers," the defendants John and Roggatz had Dr. Fuellmich "lured" to the German consulate in Tijuana on October 11, 2023, as evidenced by the relevant email correspondence in the prosecutor's file. (as stated verbatim in the investigation file in an email). This was done under the "pretext" (as stated verbatim in the investigation file) that he and his wife had to deal with urgent passport issues there. This served the purpose of having him "arrested by the Mexican immigration authorities," as the email in question further states verbatim, meaning that the Spanish immigration authorities were instrumentalized by the German domestic intelligence service/state security service to have Dr. Fuellmich kidnapped in Mexico on behalf of the domestic intelligence service/state security service. With the help of the immigration authorities they had instructed, they pretended to carry out a "deportation" in accordance with Section 144 of the Mexican Immigration Act. However, as a translation of the document, which was contrary to procedure and only available in Spanish in the file, shows, the requirements for this were not met in any way. Neither Dr. Fuellmich nor his wife had entered Mexico illegally, nor had they committed any criminal offenses in Mexico (or anywhere else). While the abduction was still ongoing, the head of the immigration authority apologized to Dr. Fuellmich on October 11, 2022, and one day later, the German Consul General in Tijuana apologized to Dr. Fuellmich's wife, stating that they had been pressured by the German Embassy in Mexico City and did not know what the matter was about.
Dr. Fuellmich was officially arrested at Frankfurt Airport on October 13, 2023, and presented with an arrest warrant issued in violation of the law and which remains false to this day. At Frankfurt Airport, the arresting police officer did not record in the arrest report that this was a deportation. Instead, he stated that Dr. Fuellmich's case was an "escorted extradition" – accompanied by two Mexican immigration officials paid by the Lower Saxony State Criminal Police Office (as evidenced by email correspondence in the public prosecutor's file). According to this version, it was not the country of Mexico that had expelled Dr. Fuellmich. Rather, according to this version, it was the country of Germany that had requested Dr. Fuellmich's extradition from Mexico to Germany.
However, this claim of extradition was also false. There was neither an extradition request to the Higher Regional Court in Braunschweig, which is required for extradition, nor were there any extradition proceedings. Both deportation and extradition proceedings would have given Dr. Fuellmich the right to a fair hearing. This would have led to the immediate termination of the proceedings. This is because the allegations in the arrest warrant of March 15, 2023 (and also the allegations later in the indictment of November 17, 2023) were all false: Dr. Fuellmich had not "simply" stolen money from the " " committee, nor had he taken out a loan in violation of company law with the intention of not repaying it. Rather, he (like Viviane Fischer) had taken out loans as the sole managing director in order to protect part of the donations from imminent seizure by the German domestic intelligence service (Verfassungsschutz/Staatsschutz). Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer (as the only active shareholders/managing directors) were, according to the articles of association, solely authorized to manage the company, contrary to what the complainants had claimed. And Dr. Fuellmich was also – unlike Viviane Fischer, who had no assets or income – at all times willing and able to repay the loan, as the taking of evidence at the latest by the end of April 2024 has shown. However, if a loan is taken out by a shareholder with company money who is willing and able to repay the loan at any time, this is permissible under company law.
This is precisely why Dr. Fuellmich was kidnapped and this kidnapping was disguised as either deportation or extradition: to deny him his right to a fair hearing, thereby preventing the certain failure of genuine deportation or extradition proceedings due to the exposure of the fake allegations. This is because any hearing of Dr. Fuellmich would have immediately exposed the arrest warrant, issued by way of a gross perversion of justice, as completely false (see the section entitled "The exposure of the arrest warrant issued by way of a perversion of justice as grossly false and the concealment of this exposure by the judge at the Moog Local Court and the accused Schindler"). The defendant Schindler also knows that the arrest warrant, which is still in force today, is completely false, based on a transcript dated November 1, 2023, containing Dr. Fuellmich's statements. However, he ignores the transcript as well as the statements made by Dr. Fuellmich on December 19, 2023, to the accused Schindler and the judges Wedekamp and Hoock, which repeat and further elaborate on the contents of the transcript, and he actively attempted to conceal these statements in order to maintain the false arrest warrant to this day.
VIII. At the end of April 2024, however, it emerged during the oral hearing before the chamber of the defendant Schindler that the loans were in fact completely in order, including under company law. And it had emerged that the complainants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, who had been questioned, had in fact stolen the money intended for the repayment of the loans, as well as client funds amounting to a further approximately 400,000 euros, under the eyes of the defendant John, who was protecting them. It also emerged that these complainants had never played any role in the committee, i.e., they had remained completely inactive and were only interested in the donations. This led to a massive dispute in August 2021 between Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer on the one hand and the two substitute members of the Corona Committee, the defendants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, as well as the additional defendant Marcel Templin accompanying them. The latter was apparently present because he had previously tried several times to convince Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich that he wanted to work on the Corona Committee instead of Justus Hoffmann, who was obviously mentally ill and therefore rarely appeared at the Corona Committee meetings.
And it turned out that the complainants had initiated the settlement negotiations with Dr. Fuellmich in March 2023, with the involvement of law professor Schwab, for the sole purpose of luring Dr. Fuellmich into a trap and having him kidnapped by the defendants Roggatz and John, as described above. Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab had therefore only entered into sham negotiations with Dr. Fuellmich on behalf of the complainants. It also emerged that this was a kidnapping committed in Mexico, disguised as either a sham deportation or a sham extradition.
Based on the findings obtained in the proceedings through witness statements, the proceedings initiated by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution against Dr. Fuellmich for his work in raising awareness about COVID-19 had now failed for the second time while the proceedings were still ongoing. The proceedings should therefore have been discontinued immediately at the end of April 2024 and Dr. Fuellmich should have been released immediately.
Against the backdrop of the impending dismissal of the proceedings and the release of Dr. Fuellmich, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security or one of its representatives (according to information available to the injured party Dr. Miseré from the German foreign intelligence service BND) now directly approached the accused Schindler to demand that sentence Dr. Fuellmich to a long prison term under all circumstances, even without the existence of a criminal offense. This is exactly what happened on April 24, 2025, when the defendant Schindler sentenced Dr. Fuellmich, ignoring all contradictory facts and witness statements, in particular the statements of the witness Viviane Fischer, to three years and nine months' imprisonment for breach of trust to the detriment of, of all people, the highly criminal complainants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann. And because the accused Schindler Dr. Fuellmich and the defense were accused of defending themselves and thereby delaying the proceedings, five months of the pretrial detention that had already lasted for more than a year and eight months on April 24, 2025, were not counted toward this sentence, resulting in a total prison sentence of four years and two months. However, according to the will of the state security and constitutional protection agencies and the judicial puppets they control, at least four more years are to be added for further fabricated crimes.
In response to the statement by the State Security Service/State Security, the accused Schindler stated on May 3, 2024, in a so-called legal notice that the proceedings would no longer be conducted on the grounds of allegedly socially unlawful loans, but would be continued on the grounds of a violation of an allegedly existing secret agreement between Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich by Dr. Fuellmich.
Although Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer had
1. concluded loan agreements, but
2. at the same time or at some point later, they had entered into a sham transaction agreement within the meaning of Section 117 of the German Civil Code (BGB), according to which the loan agreements were null and void. This, in turn,
3. for the purpose of concealing what was in fact a secret trust agreement, according to which Dr. Fuellmich
4. was obliged to transfer the loan money from the committee account to a private account and keep it there in liquid form.
However, Dr. Fuellmich did not do so, thereby violating the secret agreement, which was allegedly concluded neither in writing nor verbally, but only implicitly (!), and thus making himself guilty of breach of trust to the detriment of the complainants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, who are now acting as joint plaintiffs in the criminal proceedings. This caused them damages amounting to €350,000. It is irrelevant that these complainants, together with the third complainant, the accused Marcel Templin (in whose account the money stolen by Dr. Fuellmich and the client funds are held), Dr. Fuellmich not only stole the €700,000 intended for the repayment of the loan (in fact, they stole more than €1.158 million plus around €400,000 in client funds, as mentioned above). Although there was neither a written nor a verbal agreement with the secret content claimed by the defendant Schindler, he (Schindler) ruled this out based on a chat conversation between Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer from July 2022 (the loans date from November 2020, January 2021, and May 2021) and an email in which Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer had considered, shortly before concluding the first private loan agreement, transferring part of the loan funds to a lawyer's escrow account in California and part of the money to an account belonging to Viviane Fischer in Liechtenstein. However, these considerations were then dropped and purely private loan agreements were concluded (because the money was supposed to "disappear").
Admittedly, there is not a single word in the chat correspondence referred to by the defendant Schindler about a sham contract, a trust agreement, or a liquidity reserve. Rather, the public prosecutor's file contains an affidavit by Dr. Fuellmich, submitted to the file by attorney Willanzheimer, a former public prosecutor and then defense attorney for Viviane Fischer, dated November 12, 2023, stating that there are no other or even supplementary agreements other than the loan agreements. Nor was the indictment of the defendant John ever adapted to the invention of the defendant Schindler. However, in order to prevent Dr. Fuellmich and the defense from refuting these allegations, the defendant Schindler, in the same breath (namely with his legal notice of May 3, 2024), the taking of evidence that had begun with the examination of the prosecution witnesses and refused in particular to hear the witnesses Viviane Fischer and attorney Willanzheimer, who had been named by the defense (under protest against the burden of proof) to refute the obviously fabricated new allegations.
Since December 18, 2023, the defendant John has been facing criminal charges against the accused "port lawyers" for fraud, extortion, and other offenses. However, prosecutor John has remained completely inactive to date and has not even attempted to secure the money stolen from Dr. Fuellmich and held in the account of the defendant Marcel Templin. Since August 2024, the Göttingen public prosecutor's office has therefore also had a criminal complaint against the accused John for obstruction of justice in office. There has been no action whatsoever on the part of the Göttingen public prosecutor's office in this regard either. Instead, the president of the Göttingen Regional Court, the senior public prosecutor, prosecutor Recha, and prosecutor John have filed a complaint against Dr. Fuellmich for insulting the court and the public prosecutor's office in connection with these incidents and the inaction of the public prosecutor's office, and have initiated a penalty order for 6,000 euros. According to an expert opinion by Dr. Thomas Külken, the insults ("pack" and "fuck you") were made by Dr. Fuellmich, who has been severely traumatized by the very long period of pre-trial detention and the six months of "white torture" ordered by the accused Schindler and the accused Dr. Jakob and Luther.
IX. The defendant Schindler then ordered the so-called self-reading procedure (i.e., the written procedure) to prevent the (including international) public could understand what was going on in the proceedings, and finally announced that he intended to blame the defense for the enormous delay in the proceedings and the resulting 19 months of pretrial detention of Dr. Fuellmich. He did not want to count the pretrial detention toward the "sensitive" prison sentence repeatedly emphasized by the defendant Schindler, which he had been instructed to impose on Dr. Fuellmich by the BND (German Federal Intelligence Service) based on information provided to Dr. Miseré by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution. Accordingly, in his judgment of April 24, 2025 (see above), he did not count five months of pretrial detention toward the (already completely disproportionate) prison sentence he imposed: Former Post boss Klaus Zumwinkel, for example, was sentenced to two years' probation for tax evasion amounting to €2 million (i.e., without ever being willing or able, unlike Dr. Fuellmich, to repay the evaded money)!
In addition, he had the defendants Dr. Jakob and Luther arrange for Dr. Fuellmich to be subjected to extreme measures of so-called white torture:
For more than six months, Dr. Fuellmich was isolated from all other prisoners and held in solitary confinement (prison jargon: "separate accommodation"). He was put in chains, including leg irons, for every transport to and from court. Heavily armed officers (with pistols and submachine guns) and police vans with equally heavily armed police officers in bulletproof vests accompanied him. Every time he refused to wear a bulletproof vest, he was told that a stray bullet could hit and kill him. In addition, Dr. Fuellmich was denied permission to visit his dying mother one last time and was then also denied permission to attend her funeral. For a doctor's appointment, Dr. Fuellmich was put in chains by the head of the medical department, the accused Frank, in his private doctor's office (not in the prison) and escorted by police and prison guards at gunpoint. Thus, at gunpoint, Dr. Fuellmich was supposed to conduct an anamnesis/diagnostic interview with the accused Frank. Criminal complaints filed against the doctor and the accused Frank (including complaints filed by other fellow prisoners in pretrial detention) have also remained completely unprocessed to date. According to information from the BND available to attorney Dr. Miseré and presented in detail to the court by attorney Siemund, including photographic evidence, Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, with the help of the IT department of the Göttingen public prosecutor's office, are using false identities on the internet to attack Dr. Fuellmich, the defense attorneys, journalists, and other supporters of the defense, and hacked, among other things, Dr. Miseré's email account.
It should be added that the Göttingen public prosecutor's office and its auxiliary officers were already portrayed in an extremely negative light by the New York Times in 2022 because they allow their employees to pose covertly as right-wing extremists on the internet in order to incite other people to engage in right-wing extremist behavior, then arrest them and sentence them to prison. One of those affected has since contacted the defense and is available as a witness. And , in a recent broadcast of the US network CBS as part of the renowned series "60 Minutes," three Göttingen prosecutors named Laue, Meininghaus, and Dr. Fink were shown laughing and smirking in response to a reporter's question about whether it was really common practice in Germany to send special forces to break down the doors of completely normal citizens at night in order to arrest them for criticizing politicians. And it was precisely this democracy-destroying behavior in German law enforcement agencies and courts that US Vice President JD Vance recently addressed at the Munich Security Conference, repeating this criticism sharply once again.
X. In the meantime, lawyers Siemund and Wörmer, as well as Dr. Miseré, have proven that the complainants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, using false identities on the internet, have been posting the most vile slander and threats against the defense of the accused, journalists, and other people who support Dr. Fuellmich and the defense in various chats with sexually deviant memes around the clock. This went so far that they called for a "tsunami of complaints" against Dr. Fuellmich and the defense. The complaints that were subsequently filed were readily accepted (unlike the criminal complaints filed by the defense) by the defendants John and Recha, and criminal proceedings were initiated.
This culminated in calls for murder and led to two people manipulated by the complainants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann mingling with the audience in the courtroom. One of them had recently declared in writing on the internet that he wished the defendant Dr. Fuellmich would lie dead in his own blood in the courtroom. The request by the defense, in particular by attorney Wörmer, for assistance from the court and the public prosecutor's office (after all, this is a call for the most serious crimes) was ignored by both the defendant Schindler and the defendant Recha. They also ignored the subsequent attempt at physical assault on attorney Wörmer by the person sent to the court by Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, which took place in the courtroom (where attorney Wörmer was trying to collect herself) and could only be prevented by the intervention of court staff.
B In detail
I. Regarding Dr. Fuellmich, the formation of the Corona Committee, and the expulsion of the complainants and defendants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann in August 2021
1. Dr. Reiner Fuellmich has been a lawyer licensed in Germany and California since 1993 and has around 30 years of experience as a trial lawyer for consumers and small and medium-sized enterprises. At his law firm in Göttingen, he employed at times 17 lawyers and approximately 12 or 13 staff members in IT, accounting, security, and as legal assistants and secretaries. In the US, he was involved in two major class actions, one in a pending Michigan lawsuit over defective silicone breast implants. Most recently, in 2017, he played a decisive role in securing a settlement in favor of the plaintiffs he represented in a class action pending in Southern California against Deutsche Bank, with a dispute value of US$85 billion ( ).
Parallel to his legal practice, Dr. Fuellmich worked until 2001 at Prof. Deutsch's chair in the field of international private law and in the research center for medical and pharmaceutical law. He was significantly involved in a large number of international conferences on general liability law, medical law, and international private law. He also worked for several years as Prof. Deutsch's representative on the ethics committees of the university hospitals in Göttingen and Hanover, and for many years he lectured in German and English on American law at the University of Göttingen, at a private German-American university in Hanover, and, as part of an EU project, at the University of Tartu in Estonia.
2. Given his professional background, he was both astonished and alarmed by the declaration of a coronavirus pandemic in March 2020. At the time, he was staying with his wife and dogs at his family's ranch in Northern California, from where he regularly commuted to represent his clients in particularly important legal disputes between Germany and the US (approximately four to five times a year). At the end of May 2020, he returned to Germany with his wife and dogs. He did so in order to quickly correct what he believed to be the obvious mistake of declaring a pandemic and to end the unprecedented measures, including the de facto suspension of fundamental rights, by organizing a congress with the help of his international connections.
However, Dr. Fuellmich realized that he could not organize such a conference in Germany on his own. It was also clear that the vast majority of German lawyers would not dare to help organize such a conference out of deference to authority and/or cowardice. Before returning to Germany, he therefore contacted Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, an SPD politician he knew from his work with the anti-corruption NGO Transparency International. Dr. Wodarg recommended that Dr. Fuellmich contact Viviane Fischer in Berlin, whom Wolfgang Wodarg had known for a long time. During a personal meeting between Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer, with Dr. Wodarg joining via Facetime in early June 2020, Dr. Fuellmich proposed, as he had planned, a congress with expert specialists from all fields of science to educate the public, which was to take place over a long weekend. After that, he wanted to return to the US. However, Dr. Wodarg and Viviane Fischer did not consider this sufficient. Rather, as had already happened almost ten years earlier with regard to swine flu, an investigative committee had to be formed. And since the Bundestag refused to do so, such an investigative committee was to be set up by Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer. Dr. Fuellmich agreed, and so Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich founded the Corona Committee (as a BGB company) in Berlin at the beginning of June 2020, advised by Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, who was connected via Facetime.
This Corona Committee was to answer the questions outlined above regarding the alleged dangerousness of the virus, the suitability of the PCR test for detecting COVID-19 infections, and the dangers of the measures, in particular the lockdowns and the planned vaccinations, with the help of experts.
Viviane Fischer then decided to establish a "preliminary UG" (a type of limited liability company in Germany) in addition to the BGB association "Corona-Ausschuss" (Corona Committee), which had already been formed at the beginning of June 2020, with the aim of setting up a non-profit foundation and registering it. Why she intended to do so remains unclear to this day and has never been explained by her. She wanted to recruit two professors for this UG, a financial scientist and a proven expert in immunology and vaccinations. However, both declined. Because Viviane Fischer still wanted four members for the UG she was planning to establish, Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich, trusting in the professional competence of law professor Martin Schwab, agreed to bring two of his protégés on board, namely the later complainants and informants for the Office for the Protection of the Constitution and defendants in this case, Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann. Dr. Fuellmich knew them from his time as head of the "Justice Working Group" at the anti-corruption NGO Transparency International (which, according to the information now available, is itself corrupt and linked to the pharmaceutical industry). He hoped that they would be able to meet the demands of the Corona Committee's work, at least with the support of Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab. It should be noted that at that time, there were hardly any German lawyers who were willing to publicly criticize the measures. Viviane Fischer then founded a UG in Berlin as she had intended. She did so as a representative without power of representation, also on behalf of Dr. Fuellmich. Dr. Fuellmich subsequently approved this foundation, which had been established in his name, because although he saw no point in setting up the UG, he considered it harmless.
One day later, on July 10, 2020, the four lawyers, Dr. Fuellmich, Viviane Fischer, and the two substitute members of the Corona Committee, the so-called "port lawyers" Justus Hoffmann and Antonia Fischer, held a press conference in Berlin that was watched worldwide and immediately began broadcasting the Corona Committee's programs. Initially, these took place several times a week. However, the effort involved, especially the preparation of these broadcasts, was very considerable, and the measures had to be organized by Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich virtually "at full speed." (Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich were the only active partners/managing directors of the Corona Committee from the outset; the two substitute members, Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, did not take care of anything and were only sporadically present during the meetings, and then not at all) for the professional functioning of the committee. Among other things, Viviane Fischer organized the design of a website, the setup of IT, the filming and livestreaming of the meetings; Dr. Fuellmich ensured the establishment of professional management under the leadership of Corvin Rabenstein, professional accounting, and the organization of the extremely extensive communication with viewers, donors, and tipsters from the very beginning.
3. From day one, thousands of viewers, donors, and tipsters contacted us by phone, email, and letter. Since there was no telephone service in Berlin and only an answering machine was available, and since there was no processing of mail and emails (a mailbox was emptied at most once a week by Viviane Fischer with the help of a jute bag, without her processing the mail), viewers, donors, and tipsters turned directly to Dr. Fuellmich's law firm, which had been well known in Germany for many years due to Dr. Fuellmich's activities against banks and other corporations and could be found on the internet with a professional website. There, the previous legal work, especially in the so-called bank liability cases, was almost completely replaced by communication work for the Corona Committee. Apparently because she was overwhelmed by the immediate educational work in the Corona Committee's broadcasts, Viviane Fischer also failed to register the UG she had founded, so that this UG never came into existence and could never have its own account. However, Dr. Fuellmich and his law firm staff were not initially aware of this. They were simply wondering why, despite repeated requests from Göttingen, Viviane Fischer in Berlin was apparently unable to finally set up a separate account for the Corona Committee and, above all, to ensure professional communications work. This communication and exchange with viewers and donors was considered particularly important by Dr. Fuellmich, but also by the employees of Dr. Fuellmich's law firm who were involuntarily confronted with it.
The evaluated email communication from July 6, 2020, to November 26, 2021, found in the main file, volume 4, pages 180 to 197, reflects all of this:
On page 180 of the main file, volume 4, at the bottom, Dr. Fuellmich urges Viviane Fischer and the other members and advisors of the Corona Committee (including Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg and Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab) to set up their own account for the foundation (the establishment of which Viviane Fischer had repeatedly announced) as quickly as possible. This was because the trust account temporarily set up by Dr. Fuellmich for the Corona Committee (not for the unregistered and therefore non-existent UG) had been closed by Warburg Bank just a few days after the Corona Committee began its work due to suspected money laundering, as Dr. Fuellmich suspected on page 180 R of the file on August 8, 2020, after talking to the clerk at Warburg Bank who was familiar with the case.08.2020 on page 180 R of the file, after he had spoken on the phone with his trusted contact at Warburg Bank. As a result, since no separate account had yet been set up in Berlin for the Corona Committee or the UG supporting it, colleague Tobias Weissenborn set up a trust account for the Corona Committee. However, as evidenced by his email dated August 4, 2020, on page 181 of the file, he expressly pointed out that this account could only serve as a "transitional" account and that a "business account" for the Corona Committee itself (or the UG supporting it, which therefore had to be registered as soon as possible) had to be set up "as quickly as possible." On the same day, Dr. Fuellmich also urged the other members and assistants of the Corona Committee, as evidenced by the email on page 181 at the bottom of the file, to set up an account for the foundation or the UG (Viviane Fischer was responsible for the corporate organization, as she had stated in writing and later also verbally in court), since he had indeed received confirmation by telephone that, just as he had suspected, the account he had held in trust until then had been closed due to suspicion of money laundering.
On August 10, 2020, Dr. Fuellmich again urges the establishment of a separate account for the Corona Committee, as evidenced by page 182 of the file. He also points out that a manager for the Corona Committee must be hired as soon as possible and a professional organization must be set up, as the money for this has long since been received in the form of substantial donations (page 182, 182 R above). However, none of the addressees responded to this in any way. The day before, on August 9, 2020, Viviane Fischer had asked Justus Hoffmann to take care of, among other things, "the registration matters, the creation of a Facebook page, and the legal action regarding a deleted video" (page 182 R below and 183 above). As with all other emails, there was no response from Justus Hoffmann. Viviane Fischer therefore finally took on this task, in particular she was responsible for registering her UG, as she confirmed on page 166 R below of the main file, volume 4, in her statement on Justus Hoffmann's criminal complaint.
Now annoyed, colleague Tobias Weissenborn pointed out again on the evening of August 10, 2020, that he could only temporarily maintain a trust account for the donations (page 183 R above of the file). A little later, on the same day, as evidenced by page 184 R at the top of the file, he points out that, in view of the enormous amount of donations and the ever-increasing tasks and expenses of the Corona Committee, proper bookkeeping and tax work are necessary. There was no response to any of this, so Dr. Fuellmich finally arranged for a highly competent manager (Corvin Rabenstein) to be hired for the Corona Committee, hired an equally competent accountant (Jens Kuhn), and, with his law firm—against the will of his colleague, attorney Behn, who was nevertheless (reluctantly) organizing everything – effectively took over all communication work for the Corona Committee. The latter was of particular importance, as only professional communication work could ensure that important information for the work of the Corona Committee and, of course, donations would continue to come in. Dr. Fuellmich expressly points this out on October 19, 2020, as evidenced by page 189 below:
"We are drowning in emails," "(...) at least the international colleagues who are sending us lots of inquiries (need to be) informed about the state of affairs."
Again, there was no response from anyone.
And on page 189 R at the top of the file, Dr. Fuellmich, who, in addition to his work for the Corona Committee, also gave an average of four to five international interviews per week, points out the following:
"(...) I will probably make a video along these lines, first an interview with Michael Mross here in Germany this afternoon and then one in the US this evening, where we are receiving a great deal of support, including from lawyers."
Nowhere in the email communication evaluated is there a single response from the two substitute members of the Corona Committee, Justus Hoffmann or Antonia Fischer.
When, in February 2021, no account had yet been set up for the Corona Committee in Berlin (as Reiner Fuellmich and Tobias Weissenborn later learned because Viviane Fischer had not bothered to register the company she had founded), Tobias Weissenborn urgently reminded them once again in an email dated February 17, 2021, as shown on page 191 below, 191 R above:
"To my knowledge, no other bank account or account details have been set up yet. I therefore urge you once again to do so as a matter of urgency."
This was because not only had the account he (Tobias Weissenborn) held in trust at Commerzbank for the Corona Committee been closed, but all his other accounts at Commerzbank had also been closed by Commerzbank on suspicion of money laundering.
4. Since August 2021, the two substitutes on the Corona Committee, Justus Hoffmann and Antonia Fischer, had not appeared at all in the Corona Committee, having previously played no role either in terms of corporate law or in the day-to-day work of the Corona Committee. Viviane Fischer explains this on page 169 R at the bottom of the main file, volume 4, pointing out that the two (in complete disregard of their non-existent abilities and personalities) had set up their own rival event called "Maskforce" to the Corona Committee (which, however, failed due to lack of public interest). They had "disappeared" "from August 2020" (meaning August 2021). In August 2021, due to the lack of commitment on the part of the defendants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, a massive dispute arose between Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich on the one hand and Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann and their colleague Marcel Templin on the other. Marcel Templin had repeatedly offered his services to Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer as a replacement for Justus Hoffmann, who was obviously mentally ill, as mentioned above. After that, Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann "disappeared," as Viviane Fischer writes.
But in November 2021, they suddenly reappeared to sabotage a shareholders' meeting convened by Viviane Fischer for the purpose of registering the UG with the help of a suspected agent of the German domestic intelligence service/state security service named Jörn Böttcher from Hamburg, whom they had brought with them. This is referred to in an email from colleague Tobias Weissenborn to Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer dated November 25, 2021 (pages 195 to 196 of the main file). In this email, Tobias Weissenborn, as a proven expert in company law, advises both that Justus Hoffmann's bringing along a consultant is inadmissible under company law, and he points out (page 196 of the file) that a new company must be established immediately by Viviane Fischer as a " " "rescue company" due to the destructive behavior of Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, which is damaging to the Corona Committee/the UG, among other things, due to "betrayal of business secrets, defamation, etc."
This is because, as Viviane Fischer notes on pages 165 to 179 of the main file, volume 4, in a statement dated October 2022 on the criminal complaint against Justus Hoffmann initiated by her and prompted by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security,State Security, at her instigation, on September 2, 2022, Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann (as the above-cited email correspondence also proves) did not play any role in the Corona Committee at any time, or only played a destructive role. On page 169 at the top, she writes:
"(...) because it was not foreseeable whether Justus and Antonia, who were not involved in the substantive work, would block decision-making processes and necessary payments of invoices."
And on page 167 R at the bottom of the file, she recalls that Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg had said that Justus Hoffmann wanted money for his mere presence in the Corona Committee (contrary to the statutes!). Similarly, on page 168, she correctly recalls that Justus Hoffmann even wanted money for a book by Viviane Fischer containing summaries of Corona Committee broadcasts, which Viviane Fischer (who had written the book herself) wanted to make available free of charge to viewers and donors, with which Dr. Fuellmich was in complete agreement.
Otherwise, her statement reveals that all the allegations in the criminal complaint prepared by Justus Hoffmann and signed by him, Antonia Fischer, and Marcel Templin are grossly false and fabricated:
"Unbelievable claim" (page 169, bottom), "They could never have believed that" (page 169, right, of the file), "I can't believe that" (page 169, right, bottom), "That's not true, Reiner never said anything anti-Semitic ... What is Justus' ethnic background? This has never been an issue" (page 170 of the file), "at some point it was also said that Reiner was going to build himself a villa, and this information seemed to come from Justus and Antonia" (page 170 R of the file), "that's not true at all" (page 172 of the file), "the departure of Justus and Antonia in the summer of 2021 did not have any noticeable effect on donations" (page 173 of the file).
And regarding Justus Hoffmann's claims that they did not take any civil action because of Dr. Fuellmich's threat, which was repeatedly refuted by Viviane Fischer, she explains on page 174 of the file:
"This was not given as a reason; it was said to be for tactical reasons."
Regarding the allegations that the defendant Marcel Templin (with whom Dr. Fuellmich embezzled client funds) wanted to pursue a class action lawsuit, she explains on page 175 R at the top of the file:
"I find that absurd. Templin cannot afford to file a US lawsuit or hire someone to do so. An unknown lawyer, Marcel Templin, would not have been able to acquire these funds. Marcel Templin himself did not take any action on behalf of the clients," and so on and so forth.
5. After the shareholders' meeting in November 2021 failed because the notary Michelsburg threatened to throw the shareholders out due to the loud shouting of Jörn Böttcher, the alleged informant of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security, who had been unlawfully brought in by Justus Hoffmann, the following happened: Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, who had been recruited by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security (Antonia Fischer had apparently been a member since her legal clerkship) and, according to the available witness statements, had been controlled by it since then, demanded at the end of December 2021 — as members of the Corona Committee who had long since left (since August 2021) — in violation of the Corona Committee's statutes — half of all donations and the further "donation assets" imagined by Justus Hoffmann in the form of some rights. They did this as part of a "settlement agreement" drafted by Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab. These demands, which are outrageous in every respect, violated the Corona Committee's statutes, because according to these statutes, all donations were to be used exclusively for the purpose of investigating the Corona pandemic.
It should be noted that the statutes expressly stipulate that the shareholders of the Corona Committee are not entitled to any payments from the company's funds, i.e., from the donation assets, and that upon leaving the company, they would only receive the 125 euros they had paid in themselves (page 41, self-reading folder, volume 1).
In an email dated December 29, 2021, Justus Hoffmann threatened Viviane Fischer:
"If you want to get us out of this mess (...), then that's the price you have to pay." (Page 51 of the self-reading folder, volume 1)
Previously, on December 25, 2021, Viviane Fischer had pointed out to Justus Hoffmann that it was disloyal to first prevent the registration in order to then obtain half of the donation assets (page 52 of the file).
In response to what Viviane Fischer considered to be an outrageous attempt at blackmail, she accepted Tobias Weissenborn's proposal mentioned above for a "rescue company" in which only Dr. Fuellmich and herself would remain as shareholders/managing directors, each with a 50% stake. The establishment of this company (SCA IC UG) was subsequently approved by Dr. Fuellmich, who was in the US at the time discussing a strategy for the upcoming damages proceedings with the current Secretary of Health, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. This company was also registered in May 2022, unlike the UG with Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, which was thus "completed" and, incidentally, never came into existence. And all assets previously owned by the BGB company founded in early June 2020 by Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich were transferred to it ( ), including the loan repaid by Viviane Fischer in October 2022 to its (the registered company SCA IC UG) account. Accordingly, the gold was also stored at Degussa in the name of these two 50/50 shareholders/managing directors, Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich, without the long-since departed replacements and defendants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, who were only interested in the donated assets from the outset, having any access to it. Accordingly, a mediation attempt with around 14 participants between Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich took place in September 2022 without the long since completely irrelevant Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, but under the chairmanship of Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab.
According to an email from Viviane Fischer dated June 2, 2022, which was read out in court by Dr. Fuellmich, Viviane Fischer wrote to Dr. Fuellmich expressing her delight at the registration of this UG:
"And finally we are rid of the old shitheads."
II. First, on June 14, 2022, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security failed in its attempt to remove Dr. Fuellmich from circulation for his Corona educational work with the help of a criminal offense to be invented by the Göttingen public prosecutor's office.
According to a dossier from the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security and the Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA), which was given to attorney Dr. Miseré by an employee of the German foreign intelligence service BND who has been working with him for years, Dr. Fuellmich came under the scrutiny of the State Security and the BKA, which cooperates with it, in August 2021 because of his work in the Corona Committee and as the face of the CoronaState Security and the Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) working with it, Dr. Fuellmich came under the scrutiny of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security in August 2021 because of his work in the Corona Committee and as the face of the Corona Committee. The dossier suggests that Dr. Fuellmich should be taken out of circulation because of his very large international reach by infiltrating his personal environment, if necessary with the help of the "construction" of a criminal offense, by a compliant public prosecutor's office and negative framing by the equally compliant mainstream media, as well as with the help of demonetization (i.e., by depriving him of his entire fortune).
This approach is also reflected in the—albeit incomplete—file of the public prosecutor's office (dozens of telephone calls made by the accused John to the complainant Justus Hoffmann and the complainant Antonia Fischer, as well as the complainant Marcel Templin and Viviane Fischer, are missing, as is all communication with the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security and its auxiliary officers, including the communication with the Lower Saxony State Criminal Police Office, where the accused Roggatz was employed, and documents relevant to the decision are also missing, such as the creditworthiness documents of Viviane Fischer's husband, Jan Bohl, on the basis of which the accused prosecutor John discontinued the investigation against Viviane Fischer for breach of trust).
1. The first attempt by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security to get the Göttingen Public Prosecutor's Office to invent a criminal offense to incriminate Dr. Fuellmich
In any case, the public prosecutor's file shows that the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security quickly became aware of Dr. Fuellmich. This is because reports of suspected money laundering had been received since July 22, 2020, from the banks where Dr. Fuellmich and then Tobias Weissenborn held fiduciary donation accounts for the Corona Committee (see page 1, file 3).
Based on these reports of suspected money laundering, which were brought to the attention of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution via the State Security Department of the General Customs Directorate (thereby a Mr. Schmelter), the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security, with the help of its auxiliary officers, including at the General Customs Directorate (thereby the "state security officer" Schmelter, see sheet 1, file 3) to evaluate and analyze all accounts ever held for the Corona Committee. In doing so, it found that there was no money laundering, but that the funds were only donations for the work of the Corona Committee.
In addition, according to the analysis report sent by state security officer Schmelter to the Lower Saxony State Criminal Police Office on February 15, 2022, all expenses of the Corona Committee were recorded there, including IT, filming and livestreaming, translators, communication with donors/viewers, management, but also all gold purchases and loans.
There are no actual indications of a criminal offense in the analysis report (see pages 1 to 17 of supplementary file 3).
However, the letter in which the state security officer Schmelter forwarded the analysis report to the Lower Saxony State Criminal Police Office repeatedly points out that it concerns the "coronavirus educational work" of the Corona Committee and Dr. Fuellmich and that this is "relevant to state security": Right in the "Subject" line of the cover letter accompanying the analysis report, the words "relevant to state security" are printed in bold and capital letters, and above the name of the author, Schmelter, is the note "A 622/State Security." On page 7, the third-to-last paragraph at the end refers to Dr. Fuellmich, who is solely targeted by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security, as follows:
"According to the obligated party's own internet research, Reiner Fuellmich is well known in the lateral thinking scene."
Further information about Dr. Fuellmich can be found on pages 8 and 9:
– "Owner of the law firm Dr. Fuellmich,
– Participant in the Corona Committee,
– Chairman of the Grassroots Democratic Party of Germany (since December 2021),
– nominated as candidate for chancellor for the 2021 federal election."
This is apparently intended to suggest, and indeed urgently suggest, that Dr. Fuellmich's work and position pose some kind of political threat to the recipient of the letter.
Accordingly, page 15 at the top of the state security analysis report states:
"The Corona Committee Foundation is presumably associated with the Corona protest movement (Querdenker scene). The website https://corona-ausschuss.de is linked to the website of the Grassroots Democratic Party of Germany. Reiner Fuellmich has been chairman of the Grassroots Democratic Party of Germany since December 2021."
And on page 16, the penultimate paragraph states:
"Due to the connection to the Corona protest movement/Querdenker scene, it cannot be ruled out that transactions on the reported accounts of Reiner Fuellmich are relevant to state security."
And then, at the bottom of the same page, there is a reference to a possible criminal offense, but without any concrete facts to support this reference, i.e., it is just a guess:
"Due to the transactions described in the allegedly private sphere of Reiner Fuellmich, it cannot be ruled out that transactions (...) constitute the criminal offense of fraud or embezzlement."
This reference obviously concerns the – as has now been established – completely legal private loans for the temporary protection of part of the donations from the imminent seizure by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security. Finally, on page 17 under "IV Further Information," State Security Officer Schmelter, clearly referring to the "Corona critics and lateral thinkers" mentioned several times before (there is no other way to interpret this), points out the following:
"For your information, I would like to inform you that the analysis report (...) has been forwarded to the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution."
And:
"Other domestic public authorities have not been informed (...) to date."
At the very end, there is another "reference to the legally prescribed restriction on use" and the "prohibition on passing on information."
It is therefore quite obvious (there is no other way to interpret this) that the aim is to discredit the coronavirus criticism of Dr. Fuellmich, who has a wide international reach, which brought the Office for the Protection of the Constitution onto the scene and which is now (in accordance with the instructions in the dossier, see below) being used to find a criminal offense with which to remove Dr. Fuellmich from circulation.
2. The dossier of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security/BKA on Dr. Fuellmich
The dossier, according to which the surveillance of Dr. Fuellmich began on August 24, 2021, states on the first page:
"With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, Fuellmich increasingly came to public attention due to his critical stance toward the measures taken by the German government and international institutions to contain the virus. He expressed considerable doubts about the scientific basis of these measures and their proportionality."
The second page states:
"He believes that some of these measures disproportionately restrict fundamental rights and freedoms."
And:
"While some support his efforts and see them as a necessary contribution to the preservation of fundamental rights and democratic principles, others criticize his views as scientifically unfounded and his legal actions as counterproductive."
The statement then highlights Dr. Fuellmich's decades of work
"in the field of consumer protection and class action lawsuits,"
and it is stated:
"His legal work spans several decades, during which he has earned a reputation as a lawyer who stands up to large corporations and fights for the rights of consumers and victims."
From the perspective of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution and the BKA, Dr. Fuellmich's particular dangerousness is said to arise from the following:
"Through his admission to the bar in both Germany and California, USA, Fuellmich has the opportunity to work in an international context and deal with legal issues that have significance beyond national borders. This dual admission enables him to build bridges between different legal systems and to act in transnational cases."
And:
"In addition to his legal work, Fuellmich is also involved in public debate on legal and social issues. He gives lectures and publishes articles on topics such as consumer protection, the rule of law, and the influence of large corporations on society."
None of this has any criminal relevance. Rather, it merely demonstrates Dr. Fuellmich's international commitment to the rule of law and democracy. However, those responsible for the coronavirus pandemic at the state level, who—as evidenced by a decision of the Osnabrück Administrative Court on September 3, 2024, following an extensive evaluation of the unredacted RKI protocols , had no scientific basis whatsoever, but was driven by politicians (in Germany in particular by Jens Spahn and Karl Lauterbach, as well as Christian Drosten and Lothar Wieler, first with Angela Merkel and then with Olaf Scholz). They were afraid that this background and their own responsibility would be exposed, namely: With the help of mass psychological scare tactics, especially in the mainstream media, they had called for, among other things, economically destructive lockdowns and then the acceptance of untested, health-destroying so-called "vaccines," and they had enforced this.
Mind you, they (the above-mentioned individuals in Germany and those working with them abroad, especially in the US, led by Fauci, but also the UN sub-organization WHO with its puppet Tedros) had forced the population into these measures using mass psychological means. This has now been confirmed, among other things, by the leaked so-called "panic paper" for the German federal government (which exists in almost identical form in other countries, for example in the UK). Among other things, it states that children should feel responsible for the agonizing death of their parents and grandparents if they do not comply with social distancing and mask regulations.
In the meantime, the media outlets mentioned above were forced to reveal part of the truth, namely that the supposedly new and deadly virus originated in a laboratory in Wuhan, China, and that Drosten from Germany and Fauci from the US were also involved in the so-called "gain of function" experiments that took place there. But at the time, all this was still labeled as baseless conspiracy theories spread by right-wing anti-Semites in order to nip any discussion in the bud. Merkel and Scholz kept these findings of the BND secret from the German population and continued to spread panic.
To ensure that this secret information did not reach the public at the time, the dossier further states under "Introduction":
"The BKA has conducted a thorough investigation into the activities of Reiner Fuellmich, a person who is increasingly perceived as a potential threat to public safety and the democratic order of the Federal Republic of Germany."
Under "Facts," the BKA and the Office for the Protection of the Constitution then state:
"Through his role, Reiner Fuellmich has created a platform that could enable him to exert far-reaching influence on the political and social mood. His messages, which often display anti-democratic tendencies and could incite unrest, require an adequate and tough response from the security authorities."
In fact, this wording is a complete reversal of the facts. It was not Dr. Fuellmich who proclaimed anti-democratic tendencies, but rather he warned against the anti-democratic measures of the federal government, which, however, were attempted in lockstep by all Western-dominated countries worldwide—but nowhere as massively and as successfully as in Germany.
Incidentally, precisely these formulations – anti-democratic and trampling on the constitution, especially the freedom of expression guaranteed therein – can also be found later in the criminal complaint filed by the Berlin complainant, who has been working as an informant for the Office for the Protection of the Constitution since at least December 2021.
Under "Extended Analysis," the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security/BKA then states in the dossier:
"There is a serious concern that Reiner Fuellmich's efforts to influence political processes or to obtain a prominent political office could undermine the foundations of our democratic society."
In other words, the educational work concerning the alleged coronavirus pandemic, which has now been proven to be true and was in fact a long-planned crime against humanity, had to be stopped at all costs so that this truth could be concealed from the public. The BKA and the Office for the Protection of the Constitution go on to write:
"His activities are not only to be classified as potentially illegal, but also pose a threat to internal security."
In fact, there was a danger, but only for those criminals who had participated in what is now rightly called the "plandemic" or (in the US) the "scamdemic." The conclusion of these perpetrators and their accomplices is therefore:
"The awarding or possibility of obtaining politically exposed positions must be prevented by all means available under the rule of law."
This is precisely why the defendants Schindler, Dr. Jakob, and Luther, after failing to prevent Dr. Fuellmich from participating in the 2025 federal election as an independent candidate, prevented him from campaigning and thus from becoming visible to his voters in the mainstream media. They did this by using fabricated fantasies of violence and false allegations of alleged violence against Dr. Fuellmich, which were signed by fellow prisoners at the instigation of the defendants Schindler, Luther, and Dr. Jakob, to subject Dr. Fuellmich to six months of so-called "white torture." (at the instigation of the defendants Schindler, Luther, and Dr. Jakob) and then banned him from campaigning.
Under "Recommendations," it then states:
"The recruitment and involvement of trusted persons from Reiner Fuellmich's immediate circle is recommended."
This is exactly what happened: because Dr. Fuellmich's closest circle within his family and law firm could not be infiltrated, the German domestic intelligence service took over the three Berlin complainants in December 2021 at the latest with the help of informants Jörn Böttcher and Marcel Luthe as new informants (Antonia Fischer had already been working for the State Security Service in Berlin since her legal clerkship) and deployed them against Dr. Fuellmich. On the following page, the BKA and the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security then pointed out the necessity of using a compliant public prosecutor's office to invent criminal "constructions" in order to "prohibit Dr. Fuellmich from holding political office due to proven anti-democratic tendencies," namely as follows:
"The initiation of criminal proceedings on the basis of the evidence gathered against Reiner Fuellmich must be prepared. This includes cooperation with public prosecutors and the preparation of charges in cases of demonstrable violations of the law. Any necessary constructions must be weighed up and suitable third parties recruited."
This is exactly what happened: After the first attempt to persuade the Göttingen public prosecutor's office to invent (construct) a criminal offense as a basis for criminal proceedings against Dr. Fuellmich, which will be described in detail below, failed miserably due to the experienced and law-abiding senior public prosecutor Reinecke, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security and the BKA recruited three new informants, the accused Antonia Fischer, Justus Hoffmann, and Marcel Templin for this purpose of "destroying" Dr. Fuellmich. This is precisely what Viviane Fischer had told an Austrian activist at the end of September 2022, who in turn reported this with horror to Dr. Fuellmich's team: that she wanted to have Dr. Fuellmich "destroyed" if he were to comment publicly again on the events in the Corona Committee since September 2, 2022. As a reward for their criminal complaint of September 2, 2022, and their assistance in the abduction of Dr. Fuellmich, the "port lawyers" were allowed, under the protection of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/state security, steal Dr. Fuellmich's assets amounting to more than €1.158 million and around €400,000 in client funds without being prosecuted. They were assured immunity from prosecution for their crimes by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security and the accused prosecutor John.
The dossier then goes on to say that the public should be influenced (obviously with the help of the mainstream media and biased press statements from the court and the public prosecutor's office):
"The development of a strategy to educate the public about the risks and negative effects of Reiner Fuellmich's actions is essential."
In doing so, "cooperation with civil society organizations" should also be sought, it continues. These civil society organizations are precisely those NGOs that are paid to carry out anti-constitutional and anti-democratic work that the state cannot carry out itself without exposing its anti-democratic totalitarianism. Examples include "Omas gegen Rechts" (Grandmothers Against the Right) and "Antifa," as well as the so-called "Volksverpetzer" (People's Whistleblowers), which are paid by the city of Berlin, among others, and many, many others.
The dossier will be completed in January 2024 with a summary of the criminal proceedings taken against Dr. Fuellmich up to that point, i.e., his arrest (following his abduction from Mexico), the filing of charges, and the opening of the main trial by the Göttingen Regional Court. All details were communicated to the Office for the Protection of the Constitution and the Federal Criminal Police Office by the public prosecutor on probation who was specially transferred from Hanover to Göttingen, the accused John, and, where applicable, other persons instructing the accused John, such as the accused public prosecutor Recha or senior public prosecutor Laue:
"The details of the indictment and the investigations are based on information provided by the public prosecutor's office."
3. The failure of the criminal actions of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security under Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke
However, before this preliminary success could be achieved through the abduction of Dr. Fuellmich from Mexico on October 11, 2023, and his arrest at Frankfurt Airport on October 13, 2023, the first attempt by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution and the BKA, as outlined in the dossier and reproduced in the analysis report, to bring Dr. Fuellmich to justice with the help of a fabricated criminal offense failed miserably on June 14, 2022. This was because the experienced and law-abiding senior public prosecutor Reinecke, who was responsible for the intended criminal proceedings against Dr. Fuellmich, did not find any criminally relevant behavior after a thorough preliminary investigation, refrained from opening a criminal investigation, and had the files shelved.
This failure of the efforts by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security and the BKA unfolded as follows: The analysis report by State Security Officer Schmelter to the Lower Saxony State Criminal Police Office (LKA) dated February 15, 2022, was forwarded by the LKA to the Göttingen Public Prosecutor's Office in a letter dated (presumably, the date is not entirely clear) February 16 or March 16, 2022 (page 1 of the supplementary file, volume 1). This letter also contains no references to any criminal offenses. The suspicion of money laundering had long since been dispelled, as Mr. Schmelter's analysis for the State Security Service had revealed that the money transfers reported by the banks were completely legal donations to . Instead, the letter is again filled with unmistakable references to Dr. Fuellmich's equally legal educational work, which was the reason for the unconstitutional, anti-democratic, and anti-rule of law activities of the BKA and the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security against Dr. Fuellmich.
Right at the top of the first page, on the right-hand side, printed in bold, underlined, marked with an exclamation mark and – to ensure that no one could possibly overlook it – highlighted in yellow, it says:
"Corona reference!"
as if this were the crime to be reported, or – obviously this was the intention behind it – as if this connection (which is only dangerous for the perpetrators behind the corona-related crimes against humanity) required a crime to be invented on the basis of which Dr. Fuellmich could be taken out of circulation.
This is reflected on page 3 of this letter dated February 16 or March 16, 2022, where it states:
"According to internet research, this organization has ties to the coronavirus protest movement/Querdenker scene."
At the bottom of the page, it is again emphasized that
"the analysis report (...) was also forwarded to the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution."
And:
"An examination for relevance to national security has taken place"
and was apparently confirmed.
But then disaster struck for the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security and the BKA (in particular for the head of the BKA, Holger Münch, who was trained by Dr. Fuellmich's father and who, like the other perpetrators, now stands to lose everything). This is because the letter from the Lower Saxony State Criminal Police Office and the analysis report dated February 15, 2022, ended up on the desk of Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke (perhaps the only non-corrupt employee of the Göttingen judiciary), who, in her first order dated April 19, 2022 (page 24 of the supplementary file, volume 3) in the penultimate paragraph:
"Whether there are sufficient factual indications of criminally relevant deception in the sense of (presumably) the only possible offense of fraud through the solicitation of donations appears, at least at this stage, to be questionable."
However, since the Corona Committee was active in Berlin (Dr. Fuellmich traveled from Göttingen to Berlin and back for each broadcast), it initially ordered the case to be transferred to Berlin. But on May 19, 2022 (page 28 of the supplementary file, volume 3), Senior Public Prosecutor Fels in Berlin ordered to reject the transfer because his department
"only responsible for serious cases, in particular those involving organized crime and white-collar crime."
, but:
"The proceedings submitted do not meet this requirement, which is why there is no jurisdiction (...)".
In a ruling dated May 23, 2022, public prosecutor Knöller from Berlin then ordered the files to be returned to Göttingen because Dr. Fuellmich, as the face of the Corona Committee, lived in Göttingen and
"in the event of criminal conduct, the success of the acts occurred exclusively in Göttingen, so that the Göttingen Public Prosecutor's Office has jurisdiction."
And then, from the perspective of the anti-constitutional, anti-democratic, and anti-rule of law Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security and the Federal Criminal Police Office, the catastrophe already hinted at above occurs because the precise and meticulous (and perhaps only law-abiding employee of the otherwise thoroughly corrupt Göttingen judiciary) senior public prosecutor Reinecke, who is aware of all the circumstances, as recorded in the analysis report of February 15, 2022, and in the letter from the State Criminal Police Office (LKA) dated February 16, 2022, or March 16, 2022, refuses to initiate criminal investigations by order of June 14, 2022. And she does so with a scathing lecture from the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security and the Federal Criminal Police Office on how to behave in accordance with the rule of law – yes, she even has the file completely shelved. Right at the beginning of the order (page 30, supplementary file, volume 3), she states:
"The subject of the present proceedings is the "Corona Committee" initiated and operated by various lawyers, which is to investigate why federal and state governments have imposed unprecedented restrictions and what consequences these have for the people. In particular, scientific studies are to be promoted and meetings broadcast live on the Internet are to be held at which witnesses and experts are heard. Donations are being collected for the work of the committee, which, according to current information, are then forwarded—at least in part—to the various accounts of the various parties involved, although it is unclear how the donations are actually used in detail."
The senior public prosecutor then clarifies that she only initiated preliminary investigations for fraud against donors because embezzlement is ruled out due to the lack of a duty to manage assets:
"However, there are no grounds for an initial suspicion of fraud (breach of trust is already ruled out due to the lack of a duty to manage assets) through the possible misuse of donations by the " " (the "donation committee") in the present case. The prerequisite for criminal liability for fraud under Section 263 (1) of the German Criminal Code (StGB) is that the perpetrator, through an act of deception, obtains a disposition of property that results in a financial disadvantage for the injured party, which must be identical in substance to the enrichment intended by the perpetrator."
She then informs the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security and the Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA), which quite obviously instructed her to fabricate a criminal offense because of her work to raise awareness about COVID-19 (there is no complainant and no other public prosecutor's office that has obtained knowledge of a criminal offense and then instructed her to initiate investigations, only the State Security and the Office for the Protection of the Constitution):
"The initiation of investigations requires a suspicion based on concrete facts that a crime has been committed. Vague indications or mere assumptions cannot be the starting point for action by the public prosecutor. Investigative measures may also not have the aim of uncovering facts that serve to establish a suspicion of a crime for the first time. Rather, they presuppose a suspicion based on facts and are only permissible if behavior based on concrete facts is described that fulfills the elements of a valid criminal provision."
One could not express more clearly one's contempt for the brazen request of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security. It then states:
"However, this is not the case here. There are insufficient factual indications of criminally relevant deception in the sense of fraud through the solicitation of donations, which is the only possible offense, either in connection with the misuse of the term 'foundation' or in connection with any improper use of the donations. (...)"
It continues:
"Furthermore, it seems unlikely that the donors would be concerned about the form of the foundation, as they are more likely to be interested in the content of the 'analysis of the overall situation' promised by the committee, which is clearly intended to condemn the government's coronavirus measures at the expense of personal freedoms. The participants (...) have been and continue to be extensively involved in this announced activity. For example, there is a considerable collection of articles, studies, expert opinions, and overviews, references to further projects of the committee, etc., as well as ample video material on the announced 'meetings' (on the website of the Corona Committee, note by the signatory)."
This means that Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke had thoroughly examined what exactly the Corona Committee was doing. However, based on the analysis report, she was also aware of the loans and gold purchases made by the Corona Committee and that the law firm Dr. Fuellmich had been paid for its services (communication with donors and viewers) (see page 15 of the analysis report, supplementary file volume 3).
Finally, she states:
"Against this background, there are in any case insufficient indications that the founder or one of the founders of the Corona Committee (...) could have intended from the outset to raise funds under the guise of this committee without providing the services announced."
She then turns her attention to the loans and gold purchases and states:
"This applies even if funds were raised in excess and some of them were used for other purposes, especially since any investments made were also in line with the Corona Committee's objectives and could benefit it later."
This was indeed the purpose of the loans and gold purchases: to temporarily protect part of the donations from access by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security in order to make them available to the Corona Committee again at a later date. Finally, at the end of page 32 of the supplementary file, volume 3, she states:
"Whether the services rendered correspond to the value 'expected' by the donors is also irrelevant, as long as this does not constitute a complete disposition of purpose that is not recognizable here. This is because case law also seeks to avoid, in cases of deliberate self-harm, that any error of motive is sufficient, thereby effectively preventing fraud from also protecting freedom of disposition (with numerous further comments)."
This will also be decisive in connection with the second, particularly brazen and highly criminal attempt by the defendants Schindler and John, as well as Recha and others, prompted by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security, to remove Dr. Fuellmich from circulation. For if neither breach of trust (due to the lack of a duty to manage assets) nor fraud can be recognized as a criminal offense vis-à-vis the donors, then this is all the more true vis-à-vis the two complainants, Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, who are bound by the (publicly announced) statutes. This is all the mor e since they never played any role in the Corona exclusion and were only interested in the donations, which they wanted to seize on behalf of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security—to put it bluntly—so that the Corona Committee and its figurehead, Dr. Fuellmich, would not be able to continue their work.state security services – to put it bluntly – so that the Corona Committee and its figurehead, Dr. Fuellmich, would not be able to continue their work and Dr. Fuellmich would not be able to repay his loan.
Every fully qualified lawyer knows this, or should know it after reading this ruling by Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke. And this also applies in particular to the accused fully qualified lawyers Schindler and John. The order issued by Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke ends quite correctly with her decision on June 14, 2022, to refrain from initiating preliminary proceedings and to have the file closed. She would have done exactly the same if she had not been instructed on September 2, 2022, i.e. two and a half months later, when the following attempt by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security to bring Dr. Fuellmich to justice with the help of three criminal and obviously severely psychologically disturbed informants of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution was prevented by the intervention of the accused John and the change of the investigation file reference number.
III. Regarding the second attempt by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution and the BKA to remove Dr. Fuellmich from circulation with the help of a fictitious criminal construct, a compliant public prosecutor, and the three new informants of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution from Berlin, to file a criminal complaint, and to attempt to blackmail the complainants
1. The Corona "Plandemic" problem from the perspective of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security
According to not only the dossier but also the contents of the file prepared by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security (State Security (as cited above), the Office of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution wanted to take Dr. Fuellmich out of circulation because his work to shed light on the background of the so-called Corona pandemic had, in the view of the Office of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (and the puppet masters behind it), met with far too much international resonance.
At that time, it was still possible to nip any criticism in the bud by using the media and NGOs such as "Omas gegen Rechts" (Grandmas Against the Right), "Antifa," "Volksverpetzer" (People's Informers), etc., which, as has since been established, are paid for with taxpayer money, to slander the critic as a right-wing extremist anti-Semite. Today, the situation is different. Even though the perpetrators of crimes against humanity are trying ever more desperately to ignore this, legal action has now ensured that the RKI protocols must be published unredacted. And on this basis, the Osnabrück Administrative Court was able to determine on September 3, 2024 (Ref. 3A 224/22), after hearing the new head of the RKI as a witness, that the coronavirus measures, such as lockdowns, had no scientific basis whatsoever, but were based on a worldwide "lockstep" approach by politicians (in Germany in particular by the protagonists Merkel, Scholz, and their extended arms in the health sector, Drosten and Wieler), with the help of the mainstream media by means of mass psychological scare tactics.
The decision also states that the so-called vaccinations were completely ineffective (at least if one disregards the massive fatal consequences and serious side effects).
The leaked "panic paper" from the Ministry of the Interior, mentioned above, drafted by alleged psychologists, psychiatrists, sociologists, and other alleged scientists, makes this clear when, for example, it advises that children should be made to feel responsible for the "agonizing death of their parents and grandparents" if they do not wear masks or hug their parents or grandparents. The so-called "false alarm paper" by Stefan Kohn, a risk analyst working for the Ministry of the Interior, who prepared a risk analysis for the Ministry of the Interior, states that there were no indications of verifiable special risks posed by the allegedly new deadly coronavirus and that the intended measures were unfounded and would lead to massive claims for damages – precisely this can no longer be prevented.
At the time, both papers were removed from public discussion with the usual all-purpose defamation of a "radical conspiracy theory." And Merkel and Scholz were also aware of the findings of the BND, according to which something was wrong with the pandemic alerts because there were indications that the virus did not have a natural origin at all, but had been produced by means of so-called "gain of function" experiments in a laboratory in Wuhan, China, by Fauci and Drosten, among others, and had then escaped. However, they kept this information secret from the public until it was finally brought to light by some mainstream media outlets in early 2025. However, these BND findings were only a small part of the truth and served as a so-called "limited hangout" to distract from the even more shocking truth, namely that there was no deadly new coronavirus at all and that excess mortality only occurred after the administration of the so-called "vaccination."
The fact that these measures, especially the so-called "vaccinations" (in reality, as Prof. Alexandra Henrion-Caude explained in the Corona Committee, they were gene therapy experiments that were only called "vaccinations" because they were injected), are causing ever more damage has now been proven by Canadian pathologist and PCR test manufacturer Dr. Roger Hodkinson and Canadian statistician and physicist Prof. Denis Rancourt in a manner that can be verified by anyone: As of 2022, there had been at least 20 million deaths worldwide due to the vaccinations and more than 2.4 billion serious and severe side effects. The new US Secretary of Health, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has announced that he will investigate the matter with the help of experts through a committee, and the group of international lawyers who conducted the Model Grand Jury Proceeding at the end of 2021 and beginning of 2022, including Dr. Fuellmich, are ready for this task.
Before the "vaccinations," there had been no excess mortality worldwide, but after the so-called "vaccinations," there was a skyrocketing increase in excess mortality. This was confirmed in Germany by the work of the now emeritus head of pathology at the University Medical Center Hamburg- , Prof. Püschel, who, before the start of the so-called "vaccinations," performed autopsies on around 100 people who had died with or from COVID-19, all of whom, as it turned out, had died from diseases other than COVID-19 and had all survived their average life expectancy of 82 years. This was also proven by the work of the late emeritus pathologist Prof. Arne Burkhardt, whose autopsies on people who had died after the so-called "vaccinations" showed that in more than 80 percent of cases, the so-called "vaccination" was the cause of death.
But all this had to be kept secret from the public at the time. And that is why the decision by senior public prosecutor Reinecke on June 14, 2022, to dismiss and refuse any criminal investigation against Dr. Fuellmich for reasons of state security and constitutional protection, and the so-called politicians who used her as a tool, was a disaster. For Dr. Fuellmich and the lawyers working with him internationally were on the trail of everything outlined above.
2. The urgent need to repay the loan immediately is forcing the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security to resort to "port lawyers."
And that is precisely why the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security and the BKA felt compelled to launch another (this time highly criminal in every respect) attempt to remove Dr. Fuellmich from circulation. This had to happen very quickly (see below), and therefore the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security and the BKA had no choice but to rely on the Berlin "port lawyers" (the complainants) whom they had meanwhile recruited as informants and to induce them to file a hasty criminal complaint on September 2, 2022. This was despite the fact that neither the Office for the Protection of the Constitution nor the BKA could have failed to notice what was clearly reflected in an evaluated chat message from Dr. Fuellmich to his former co-host Viviane Fischer, namely that (as Dr. Fuellmich had been informed by Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab and Antonia Fischer after Dr. Fuellmich had noticed that Justus Hoffmann repeatedly disappeared for weeks at a time) the author of the criminal complaint, Justus Hoffmann, suffers from severe mental health problems. He therefore represented a ticking time bomb for everyone, as has since become apparent from his covert internet activities under the telling pseudonym "Dominatrix" with sadistic-sexual overtones (see also below for details). In that chat message to Viviane Fischer on January 16, 2021, Dr. Fuellmich states:
"Justus, according to Antonia yesterday, is at the level of a 12-year-old (please keep this confidential), his therapist apparently died recently and the new one hasn't started yet. Feel free to call me."
Dr. Fuellmich had provided this information to Viviane Fischer in response to a tip from Prof. Dr. Schwab, whom he had asked for an explanation for Justus Hoffmann's constant unexcused absences and erratic behavior at the Corona Committee meetings. Following Prof. Dr. Schwab's comment, he had spoken in more detail with Antonia Fischer, who provided with the relevant information, as passed on by Dr. Fuellmich to Viviane Fischer in this chat. Justus Hoffmann's behavior in court, his (and Antonia Fischer's) sadistic-sexual hate speech on the internet, a letter from Justus Hoffmann to the court that was kept secret by the court, and much more (including witness statements) have far exceeded the worst fears regarding Justus Hoffmann.
Despite these problems with Justus Hoffmann, which were also known to the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security and the BKA (presumably for a long time through corresponding communications from Antonia Fischer, who had already been working for State Security for a long time), the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security had to resort to him and the two other "port lawyers" he had dominated legally because the matter was of the utmost urgency. The Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security had to resort to him and the two otherState Security had to resort to him and the two other "port lawyers" he dominated – legally – because it was a matter of utmost urgency. The Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security prompted the three to file a completely hasty criminal complaint with the Göttingen Regional Court on September 2, 2022. This was because a few days earlier, on August 26, 2022, the three "port lawyers" of Viviane Fischer, who in turn had been sent to the "port lawyers" by Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, had learned from an email from Dr. Fuellmich dated August 26, 2022, which Viviane Fischer had passed on to them, that Dr. Fuellmich would repay his loan. However, this (the loan) was the only way to pin a criminal "construction" on Dr. Fuellmich, as desired by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security.
Therefore, it was necessary to file a criminal complaint immediately, to prevent Dr. Fuellmich from repaying the loan, and to prevent Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke from being involved in the case again.
Accordingly, the accused Justus Hoffmann quickly drafted a criminal complaint—which clearly reflected his inexperience (he had only been admitted to the bar in 2019) and his mental health issues—and faxed it, signed by the accused Marcel Templin and Antonia Fischer, to the Göttingen public prosecutor's office on September 2, 2022. At the same time, all three began, with the help of the BKA and the Verfassungsschutz/Staatsschutz (German domestic intelligence services), to locate the buyer of Dr. Fuellmich's Göttingen property and put pressure on him. They did this so that the buyer would not transfer the majority of the purchase price, namely an amount of more than 1.158 million euros, to Dr. Fuellmich or his wife, as stipulated in the purchase agreement for the property in Göttingen, but to the accused Marcel Templin, on the instructions of the notary Dr. Kleinjohann, who was informed of every detail but was apparently corrupt. This ensured that Dr. Fuellmich would be prevented from repaying the loan and, apparently, cleared the way for criminal charges to be brought, although this also failed.
Furthermore, at the instigation of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security, the accused probationary public prosecutor John von Hannover was transferred to Göttingen to prevent the senior public prosecutor Reinecke, who was actually responsible, from also dropping these proceedings. In detail, this happened as follows:
According to Appendix 3 (email from Dr. Fuellmich dated August 26, 2022, referring to the imminent repayment of the loan), which the three "port lawyers" accused by submitted to the Göttingen Public Prosecutor's Office on September 2, 2022, together with the criminal complaint, the Göttingen Public Prosecutor's Office, and thus also the accused public prosecutor John and the accused Recha, were informed from the outset that the three "port lawyers" had no claims against Dr. Fuellmich and that Dr. Fuellmich was in the process of repaying the loan to the Corona Committee by selling his last German property (all others had already been sold). Furthermore, they were informed from the outset that Dr. Fuellmich wanted to continue his educational work in the interests of the donors, as stated in the statutes, even though, due to considerable problems with co-host Viviane Fischer (these are also addressed in Appendix 3 to the criminal complaint), he wanted to pursue his own projects (but exclusively in the interests of the donors and in accordance with the purpose of the donations) in addition to the joint work, just as he had granted Viviane Fischer; Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, who had long since left in August 2021, had not played a role for Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer for a long time and were therefore no longer involved in extensive mediation efforts in September 2022.
3. The "smoking gun" exposing the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security
The decisive "smoking gun," i.e., the proof that this second attempt by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security to bring Dr. Fuellmich down was exclusively based on his completely legal (cf. Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke of June 14, 2022) Corona information work, can be found on page 1 of the new file.
Of course, the defense was not given the original of this page 1 of the new file, but at least a photograph of a separately secured slip of paper. This slip of paper is kept separately in a small plastic bag and apparently comes from a larger pad of paper, as evidenced by the printout at the top left "BDK Bund Deutscher Kriminalbeamter" (Association of German Criminal Investigators). At the top right of the note is the (page) number 1. Below this is a police file number and then the word
"Corona."
Usually, the name of the crime under investigation precedes the investigation file, i.e., a term such as murder, manslaughter, fraud, deprivation of liberty, or similar. However, the term "Corona" clearly does not refer to a criminal offense. Rather, this term refers to the so-called Corona pandemic declared worldwide in March 2020 in coordination with the WHO. This was based largely on the deliberately induced mass false positive results of the PCR test, which Drosten and Wieler (Drosten is referred to as the "German scientist" by Fauci in the US when he refers to the PCR test) described as the gold standard for the diagnosis of coronavirus infections, but which is not approved for diagnostic purposes and is completely unsuitable for this purpose.
Of course, this does not in itself constitute a criminal offense. It only becomes a criminal offense and leads to criminal proceedings against those responsible when it is recognized as a planned pandemic/scandemic, largely due to the work of Dr. Fuellmich and many scientists and lawyers around the world who are networked with each other.
However, as is well known, a small but growing group of people—worldwide! noticed that something was wrong with this alleged pandemic, resistance has formed (in 2025) against the increasingly absurd and pointless "measures," such as the legal requirement to wear masks while walking in a restaurant but not while sitting, and, of course, the so-called "lockdowns" and later the massive pressure on the population to obtain supposed immunity with untested, extremely dangerous so-called "vaccines."
It was precisely this resistance that was suddenly criminalized. In particular, doctors who issued patients with so-called mask exemptions or vaccination exemptions were and are being prosecuted in Germany and brought before the courts to be sentenced to long prison terms.
It is quite obvious that it is precisely this form of criminalization that led to page 1 of the actual investigation being labeled "Corona":
So that investigators and other law enforcement officials, such as the public prosecutor's office and criminal judges, who rightly manipulated the public (cf. the "panic paper" cited above) could immediately recognize that no crime was apparent (because it first had to be invented or "constructed," as the Office for the Protection of the Constitution and the State Security Service note in their dossier on Dr. Fuellmich), but that this was about something like an enemy of the state, who was known to himself and many others as an internationally trained, internationally experienced, and above all internationally networked lawyer, who, in accordance with the principle of audiatur et altera pars, wanted to make himself heard and establish (according to the Corona Committee's self-imposed task, as formulated by Dr. Fuellmich):
a) how dangerous the allegedly new deadly virus was,
b) whether the PCR test, hailed as the gold standard for detecting infection with the alleged virus, was really capable of detecting such infections, and
c) how dangerous the so-called measures, in particular the "lockdowns" and the so-called "vaccinations," were.
The very fact that such work was criminalized at all proves that those who first declared the pandemic, then sought to enforce the measures, and finally began this large-scale criminalization of mere educational measures and efforts, had something to hide. This is confirmed by the unredacted RKI protocols and the BND findings that are now available. For them, the true perpetrators of crimes against humanity, whose crimes are becoming increasingly visible, everything is at stake in the truest sense of the word.
4. The email from Dr. Fuellmich dated August 26, 2022, attached to the criminal complaint as Appendix 3, stating that the loan is currently being repaid
Because the email from Dr. Fuellmich to Viviane Fischer dated August 26, 2022, attached as Annex 3 to the criminal complaint by the so-called "port lawyers," is of crucial, central importance, it will be discussed first.
Right at the beginning, in the first paragraph of the email from Dr. Fuellmich to Viviane Fischer and others (including Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab and Wolfgang Wodarg) attached as Annex 3 to the criminal complaint, Dr. Fuellmich complains that the viewers of the Corona Committee (once again) have to suffer from the chaos (which, in Dr. Fuellmich's view, was caused by co-host Viviane Fischer) and have therefore contacted Dr. Fuellmich or his law firm by email (page 38 of the main file, volume 1):
"Because now some of the committee viewers are wondering (I forwarded one of the emails to Corvin and Viviane yesterday and am attaching it here again) what is going on with us. Neither the Nachlese (as Viviane Fischer called the summaries of the Corona Committee meetings sent by Dr. Fuellmich for a long time with Roger Bittel, after she had taken them away from Roger Bittel in order to conduct them in the committee itself with Dr. Fuellmich, note by the undersigned) is running, nor is the committee meeting taking place today. And there is no communication whatsoever for the viewers (...)"
In the second paragraph of the email, Dr. Fuellmich explains that the gold purchased for the Corona Committee had always been kept safe and continued to be kept safe.
In the third paragraph, Dr. Fuellmich then provides information about the repayment of the loan and that this will be done through the long-planned sale of his fifth and last German property, the value of which would have been sufficient for repayment (in case of need) at any time prior to this:
"Likewise, there was never any doubt that my property in Göttingen was fully valuable. In the event of any liquidity problems, it would have been possible at any time to use a land charge of €700,000, either there (or alternatively in California), to close the liquidity gap."
He then explains that only clueless lawyers could believe that the Göttingen property, which was completely unencumbered at the time (there were only long-paid land charges, i.e., so-called "owner's land charges," i.e., land charges for Dr. Fuellmich himself, the owner of the property), was not of the highest value.
Dr. Fuellmich further points out that the three so-called "port lawyers" from Berlin had no claims against Dr. Fuellmich, not even any claims derived from Dr. Fuellmich's class action clients, but nevertheless refused to hand over the client files and client funds. They had been allowed to manage these for a period of time while Dr. Fuellmich carried out all the legal work together with international colleagues, as well as all client communications, out of goodwill and appreciation for their patron, Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab.
Dr. Fuellmich then points out that the value of the property is now no longer even necessary for sudden liquidation by charging it to repay the loan in the event of a liquidity problem, which had not occurred until then, but that the loan would simply be repaid through the sale of the property, which is currently taking place:
"However, it is no longer a question of a possible encumbrance of the Göttingen property in the event of liquidity problems on the part of the committee, but rather that the property is currently for sale for the reasons known and described on several occasions, with expected proceeds of at least 1.3 million euros."
The "known reasons, which have been described several times" were the deliberate economic collapse in Germany feared by Dr. Fuellmich, his friends, and his family (which is now obvious to everyone) and which is being brought about in "lockstep," i.e., in unison, in other European countries such as the UK, France, etc. As a trained banker with international experience (he had worked for Deutsche Bank in Tokyo for a year as a banker for corporate clients, among other things), Dr. Fuellmich saw this as inevitable. He had explained this to the other recipients of this email (including Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab, Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, and the manager of the Corona Committee, Corvin Rabenstein) as well as to Viviane Fischer. And he had repeatedly explained to Viviane Fischer during their almost daily phone calls that the loan was also to be repaid from this sale. This was done on the assumption that she too would be able to repay her loan by liquidating her "store of value," namely the property in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, to which she refers in a shareholders' meeting on October 5, 2022, as evidenced by page 9 in the middle of the main file, volume 2. Dr. Fuellmich only learned later that there was a marriage contract between Viviane Fischer and her husband, according to which the property belonged exclusively to the husband.
On page 39 at the bottom of the main file volume 1, Dr. Fuellmich explains once again in his email dated August 26, 2022, that his law firm staff had been inundated with communications from viewers and donors of the Corona Committee, which had not been dealt with in Berlin. On page 41 at the top of the main file, volume 1, Dr. Fuellmich confronts Viviane Fischer with the fact that she had transferred a significant amount of committee funds to her account at 2020 News and used them in an incomprehensible manner (unlike all other expenses of the Corona Committee, no records had been kept). He also confronts her with the fact that (as of August 2022) she had used between €60,000 and €70,000 from her book pre-sales, which were actually intended to print her book and send it to buyers, to repay her loan:
"And in the recent past (this has remained undisputed since my last email), around 60,000 or 70,000 euros have been received from pre-orders for your book, which you have used to pay the committee. This was used to repay the loan of €100,000 used for living expenses (again, this is not a reproach). However, you now need exactly this amount to have the book printed and deliver the pre-orders."
Dr. Fuellmich then proposes a solution to Viviane Fischer for continuing the work of the Corona Committee. It should be noted that at this point, only two companies existed. On the one hand, there was the BGB company founded in Berlin in early June 2020 by Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich; the formation of the UG envisaged by Viviane Fischer with Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann as substitutes had failed due to the torpedoing of the UG's registration by the complainants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann with the help of the V-man of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution, Jörn Böttcher, in December 2021. On the other hand, there was the SCA IC UG, founded and registered solely by Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich, which Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich had established as a "rescue company" at the end of 2021 on the advice of lawyer Tobias Weissenborn, after it had been determined that Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann wanted to harm the Corona Committee exclusively (apparently on behalf of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security). This UG (with which Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann no longer had any formal connection) had also been established through registration and therefore had its own account, to which Viviane Fischer also repaid her loan.
Angered by the chaos caused by Viviane Fischer from the outset and, in Dr. Fuellmich's opinion, even worse at that time in the Corona Committee (Dr. Fuellmich had explained this in detail in a chat message dated July 10, 2022, after he had briefly explained it to her verbally in the courtyard of Zillestraße in Berlin, see page 21 of the self-reading folder, volume 3) and her arbitrary refusal to continue paying for the communications work of Dr. Fuellmich's law firm (see chat message dated July 6, 2022, page 11 of the self-reading folder 3); even though she was, just like Dr. Fuellmich, a 50% shareholder and managing director of the UG, and even though she continued to pay the service providers she had hired (including her Polish IT guy, who cost between 8,000 and 20,000 euros per month), as well as the media company of her then partner, he wrote:
"Now to the proposed solution: It cannot be that the proceeds from the sale of the gold and the return of liquidity end up back in your business account, because firstly, I do not want my law firm to continue doing the committee's work without the employees who do this work being paid for it, and secondly, each of us should have the opportunity to carry out our own projects in line with the committee's objectives (I am thinking, for example, of the blood bank for the unvaccinated, and you may want to consider further pathology support). Above all, however, the chaos at all levels caused by your creativity is threatening (last night, asked me of all people in the board Zoom meeting about the union, saying he had been unable to reach anyone and didn't even know how to do so, you immediately left the Zoom meeting when I referred to you because it is your project, saying that you had to take care of your sick dog) there is also a financial risk:
Because you failed to pay the rent for your former hat shop and then apparently didn't hear about the legal action, your account was seized. That was very, very close to being dismissed (it has since been confirmed that the committee account itself was also seized, note by the signatory). I have heard that something similar could happen because of unpaid tax debts owed by a limited liability company that you ran with your husband (originally only €2,500, but now around €12,000) or that you still run.
Against this background, I suggest dividing the funds (after deduction of the costs still to be paid) in half and depositing each half in a secure account, i.e., an account that cannot be accessed by any creditors, namely a lawyer's escrow account. Each of us can dispose of the two accounts independently, but must provide transparent proof each month that we have not used the funds to buy a Ferrari, for example, but have used them exclusively for the purposes of the committee. If necessary, the committee's expenses can then be paid from a third account, to which the necessary funds must be transferred from the other two accounts. From now on, I will no longer have to worry about erratic, undocumented payments.
Should we also be able to agree on this, I would also immediately agree to the liquidation of the gold (the gold was also only accessible to Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich, and no longer to Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann as former committee members, note by the signatory), However, this would be subject to the condition that any gold amount falling under my fiduciary custody would remain in this form. Above all, however, the work of the committee should then be resumed immediately, whereby – as stated above – each of us should be free to pursue our own committee projects in addition to our joint work.
In summary: Appendix 3, which the complainants and informants of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security attached to their criminal complaint of September 2, 2022, an email from Dr. Fuellmich dated August 26, 2022, proves that
a) Dr. Fuellmich was in the process of selling his last German property as planned and using the proceeds from the sale to repay the loan he had taken out for the temporary protection of part of the donations. (He had already sold two houses in Leinestraße and Burgstraße in Göttingen, a house at Waldrebenweg 2 in Göttingen, and a house in Bremen since he had met his wife Inka in 2008 and they had both decided to reduce Dr. Fuellmich's workload and, to this end, significantly downsize the law firm in order to subsequently dispose of all assets located in Germany, because Dr. Fuellmich, as a former banker at Deutsche Bank, had recognized what is now obvious to everyone, namely that Germany would plunge into economic chaos);
b) the so-called "port lawyers" had no claims against Dr. Fuellmich, but refused to hand over client documents and client funds belonging to the class action clients represented solely by Dr. Fuellmich;
c) Despite massive problems with Viviane Fischer, whom he perceived as chaotic and unstructured, Dr. Fuellmich intended to continue the educational work financed by donors, i.e., to continue the so-called "analysis of the overall situation (...) which is clearly intended to condemn the government's Corona measures at the expense of personal freedom" (page 31, supplementary file 3) initiated by Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke.
"analysis of the overall events (...) which is clearly intended to condemn the government's coronavirus measures at the expense of personal freedom" (page 31, supplementary file 3).
This content of the email dated August 26, 2022, which, mind you, was attached by the complainants themselves to their criminal complaint dated September 2, 2022, is in direct contradiction to the content of the criminal complaint itself, which, as has since been established (see below), is false and simply a pack of lies in every respect.
5. The exclusion of Dr. Fuellmich's lawyers in order to deny him his right to a fair hearing and the completely groundless and unlawful seizure of the assets of Dr. Fuellmich's wife
This means that from the moment this criminal complaint accompanied by this appendix was received, i.e. from September 2, 2022, investigations were necessary to determine which version of the story was accurate: that of the complainant or that of Dr. Fuellmich. In view of the self-evident nature of this legal fact (at least for every public prosecutor and judge), this requires no further explanation. Accordingly, there is also a note dated January 31, 2023, from police investigator Spörhase, who apparently wanted to do his job properly, in whose report, on page 135 of the main file, volume 1, referring to a meeting on November 4, 2022, with the accused John and senior public prosecutor Laue, who is involved in another judicial scandal, and police officer Köhler, it states:
"During this meeting, the procedure in this investigation was coordinated (...) After evaluating the account statements received, the complainants (page 1 of the file) and the witness Viviane Fischer (...) are to be questioned as witnesses." (Emphasis added by the undersigned)
However, these absolutely necessary investigations were not carried out. Nor was the accused, Dr. Fuellmich, heard. Under criminal procedure, he should have been heard before an arrest warrant was issued and an indictment was drawn up. In this specific case, this was absolutely necessary because the email dated August 26, 2022, which was submitted by the complainants themselves as an attachment to the criminal complaint, directly contradicts the content of the criminal complaint itself. Instead, on November 4, 2022, the accused John merely ordered a re-examination of the accounts, as had already been done shortly before, according to the analysis report of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution dated February 15, 2022. Otherwise, he did not undertake any investigations.
Only after massive pressure from attorney Tobias Weissenborn (see page 176, main file, Volume 2), whom he had previously refused access to the files in order to represent Dr. Fuellmich's interests and thwart Dr. Fuellmich's right to a fair hearing, did he hear Tobias Weissenborn two days before Dr. Fuellmich's abduction from Mexico.
It was solely the background of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security, which had brought about the transfer of public prosecutor John von Hannover to Göttingen so that senior public prosecutor Reinecke would not also be able to thwart this second attempt by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security to remove Dr. Fuellmich from circulation because of his Corona educational work, explains why the interrogation of the three complainants and Viviane Fischer, which was still planned for November 4, 2022, did not take place at any time.
Despite Dr. Fuellmich's email of August 26, 2022, which refuted all of the claims made by the "port lawyers" in their criminal complaint of September 2, 2022, the defendant John did not initiate any investigation whatsoever, but instead had the account and pension entitlements of Dr. Fuellmich's wife seized up to the amount of €200,000. The defunding of the Fuellmich family thus continued after the defendant John had already protected the theft of more than €1,158,000 from Dr. Fuellmich by the "port lawyers" and the embezzlement of around 400,000 euros of client funds from Dr. Fuellmich's clients, by now also seizing all the bank accounts and pension entitlements of Dr. Fuellmich's wife, even though there was no evidence whatsoever that she had committed any criminal offense. The chronological sequence of events is as follows:
On March 27, 2023, attorney Tobias Weissenborn wrote to KHK Düwel of the Göttingen Police Department as follows, with the subject line:
"Tgb number/file number of the public prosecutor's office: currently unclear, preliminary investigation against Dr. Reiner Fuellmich" (page 176 of the main file):
"Dear Sir or Madam, Dear Chief Inspector Düwel,
In connection with an unspecified investigation, a Mr. Alexander Marunde appeared at the law office of my client, Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, today as part of a personnel search. I have been informed by a third party that an arrest warrant has been issued against my client, , and that he is to be remanded in custody. I hope you can tell me whether this is actually true (...) The proper authorization is expressly confirmed by a lawyer (...) Against this background, I now request information on what decisions have been made against my client and are to be enforced against him. I also request information on the public prosecutor's file number, as we will of course be requesting access to the case file. I also request that you forward this letter to the public prosecutor's office responsible with a request for a response at your earliest convenience. I look forward to hearing from you soon (...)"
The first response of the accused John to this is, as evidenced by page 177 R of the main file, the following handwritten note:
"In view of the apparent knowledge of the arrest warrant (...) there should be no further delay in executing the arrest (meaning the seizure of Dr. Fuellmich's wife's bank account and her pension entitlements due to occupational disability, note by the undersigned). Ms. Judicial Officer, please execute the arrests and seize the defendant's account and her pension entitlement. Then safe deposit box, car question?"
Lawyer Tobias Weissenborn, whom the accused John refused to allow to inspect the files because he had blindly trusted the credibility of the complainant – even though this was seriously called into question by the email of August 26, 2022, attached to the criminal complaint – and had also launched investigations against him, was finally heard on October 9, 2023, two days before Dr. Fuellmich was abducted from Mexico. As a result, the accused John had to drop the investigation against Tobias Weissenborn. This was because it had emerged that even the first transfer of the first €200,000 from the donations, which had been made by Tobias Weissenborn, had not been an unlawful misappropriation of donations, but was also a normal private loan (just like the second amount of €500,000). Lawyer Tobias Weissenborn explained (page 266 of the main file, volume 3):
"The background to the transfer is a loan that, to my knowledge, was granted to Mr. Fuellmich by the Corona-Ausschuss Vorschalt-UG foundation. I also have a loan agreement (...) Since this was a private loan, I had no reason to suspect anything when the money was transferred to his wife's account."
For exactly the same reason that prosecutor John was now forced to drop the investigation against attorney Tobias Weissenborn, he should have dropped the investigation against Dr. Fuellmich's wife at the same time. First, even the complainants had correctly stated that the loan totaled 700,000 euros (page 17, main file volume 1: "Loan in the amount of 700,000 euros"), so that even the accused John must have been aware from the criminal complaint that it was not, as he had assumed in the arrest warrant of March 15, 2023 (out of stupidity?), but rather loans totaling 700,000 euros, as also communicated by the complainants. Secondly, only the first €200,000 had passed through the account of Dr. Fuellmich's wife (because all of Dr. Fuellmich's private accounts had been closed at that time). And thirdly, the accused John himself stated in his statement of March 14, 2023 (page 138, main file volume 2) regarding his actions against Dr. Fuellmich's wife:
"There is currently (still) no urgent suspicion of criminal activity on the part of the accused Inka Fuellmich-Schönbohm for aiding and abetting breach of trust (...). It is not yet clear to what extent she knew that there was no right to use the funds. In any case, it will not be possible to prove that she was aware of the content of the articles of association – in particular (alleged lack of sole executive authority, note by the signatory) – and the shareholder agreements."
Of course, the accused John should also have heard Dr. Fuellmich's wife in order to comply with her right to a fair hearing. However, he failed to do so or deliberately prevented this, even though attorney Cathrin Behn expressly requested him to do so on April 24, 2023:
"(...) we hereby declare that Ms. Inka Fuellmich-Schönbohm (...) has instructed us to represent her legal interests. In order to examine the matter (the alleged offense), we request access to the case files, including any additional files, and ask that these be sent to our office address for three days."
However, the accused John also rejected this request, stating that he was also investigating attorney Behn, even though there was no suspicion of a criminal offense against her. Here, too, the accused John was solely concerned with thwarting Dr. Fuellmich's right to a fair hearing and thus preventing his completely false arrest warrant from being exposed immediately.
At the very latest, however, after the defendant was forced to drop the investigations against attorneys Tobias Weissenborn and Cathrin Behn, he should have also dropped those against Dr. Fuellmich's wife. This is because his measures against them were based solely on the criminal complaint filed by the complainant, who, as has since been established (see details below), lied in every respect, and on the (transparent and never disputed) account documents, as he himself states on page 156, main file volume 2:
"The suspicion of a crime arises from the criminal complaint filed by the co-shareholders (...)"
There was not even a strong suspicion against Dr. Fuellmich's wife (see above), but only an initial suspicion (page 154, main file volume 2) of aiding and abetting breach of trust. And the suspicion, which he expressed in the arrest warrant for reasons that are incomprehensible to him, and even contrary to the content of the criminal complaint, that the €200,000 paid into Dr. Fuellmich's wife's account was donation money taken illegally and without legal basis had vanished into thin air by the time of the interrogation of attorney Tobias Weissenborn on October 9, 2023, at the latest. This is because he had made it clear when handing over a loan agreement that the €200,000 was a completely legal private loan, which is why he had no reason to suspect anything when transferring the money to Dr. Fuellmich's wife's account. But why should Dr. Fuellmich's wife have had any reason to be suspicious when a private loan for her husband was paid out via her account on the basis of a corresponding loan agreement?
The assumption made by the accused John, based solely on the lies of the complainants, that Dr. Fuellmich (and Viviane Fischer) did not have sole power of representation, would also have been immediately exposed and would never have become a key element of the arrest warrant and the indictment if John, as intended by police investigator Spörhase, had questioned the complainants and Viviane Fischer or even just the accused Dr. Fuellmich. It no longer seems merely strange that John did not drop the investigation against Dr. Fuellmich's wife when it became clear that his assumption that Dr. Fuellmich had no sole power of management had proven to be false. Apparently because the accused John is embarrassed that he not only investigated sloppily, but not at all, he did not correct his gross error, but continued to seize the pension entitlements of Dr. Fuellmich's wife. This confirms once again that this was indeed the intention from the outset, as described in detail in the "dossier" on the actions of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security:
a) To remove Dr. Fuellmich from circulation by all means, including highly criminal ones, of a Gestapo or Stasi police state, so that he would not be able to continue his international work, and
b) to deprive him and his family, including his wife, of all financial means, i.e., including all means of Dr. Fuellmich's wife from her disability pension.
6. The protection of witness Viviane Fischer from prosecution by the accused John
This urgent suspicion of serious state crimes (which are not limited to perversion of justice) is confirmed by the more than irritating behavior of the defendant John in the case of Ms. Viviane Fischer, who has also been reported for breach of trust. She too had wanted to use a loan (in the amount of 100,000 euros) to temporarily protect part of the donation money from arbitrary access by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security and the public prosecutor's office. However, unlike Dr. Fuellmich, she was unable to repay the loan at any time due to a lack of income and assets.
Instead, she was only able to repay the loan by committing fraud, namely by passing off a book written exclusively by her as a joint work by her and Dr. Fuellmich and then using the proceeds from the pre-sales of the book not for printing and delivery, but to repay the loan. This is precisely why she was unable to deliver the book in August 2022 as contractually agreed, but only managed to do so more than seven months later; to date, countless pre-orderers have not received the book. Surprisingly, however, the defendant John had no problem communicating in detail with Willanzheimer, the lawyer representing Viviane Fischer at the time, while consistently refusing to do so with Dr. Fuellmich's lawyers, claiming that they, too, were under investigation. And when lawyer Willanzheimer informed him in a letter dated April 12, 2022, that his client did not actually have any money, but that her husband was particularly wealthy, he discontinued all investigations against Viviane Fischer by order of April 19, 2023, without even attempting to verify this information, stating the following as his reason:
"The loan agreement may be questionable in light of (he refers to the alleged lack of sole power of representation, note by the signatory) company law. However, in view of the fact that the loan principal was repaid in full before the criminal complaint was filed and the defendant's husband has credibly (...) assured that liquid funds were available at all times (...), I cannot establish sufficient suspicion of a criminal offense."
Contrary to his assumption expressed here, Viviane Fischer (like Dr. Fuellmich) did indeed have sole power of representation, and: Viviane Fischer had not repaid her loan before the criminal complaint was filed on September 2, 2022 (in fact, this did not happen until October 21, 2022, as the evidence available to the defendant John clearly proves), nor had the defendant John even begun to verify the husband's statements regarding his liquidity. Did this have anything to do with the fact that Viviane Fischer was the one who, through her meeting with the V-men of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution in August 2022, initiated by Dr. Wodarg, had made the criminal complaint, the abduction, and the demonetization of the Fuellmich family possible in the first place?
In any case, it is clear that the arrest warrant requested by the accused John on March 15, 2023, was blindly signed on the same day without any review and without a legible signature by Judge Moog at the district court. It is therefore formally invalid according to the highest court ruling. Like the proceedings against Dr. Fuellmich's wife (who was not even reported by the complainants), this arrest warrant, which is already formally invalid, is based on the criminal complaint filed by the accused "port lawyers," which consists exclusively of false accusations (see Viviane Fischer's detailed statement on this criminal complaint, main file, volume 4). Admittedly, a bank account analysis was also carried out, which was initiated by the accused John. However, this had already been carried out long before the first attempt by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution to remove Dr. Fuellmich from circulation and had not revealed anything unusual, as nothing had been concealed or disguised. The only basis for the even more false arrest warrant was therefore the criminal complaint filed by the complainants/informants of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security, which was false from start to finish.
Once again: The account movements, which correctly reflect all expenses and income of the Corona Committee (with the exception of the approximately 95,000 euros that Viviane Fischer had transferred from the donation account to her 2020 news account and whose use has never been clarified), were never disputed. Therefore, because the criminal complaint alone was the basis for the arrest warrant against the accused John, a closer look at this sole basis for the arrest warrant against the accused John is warranted (pages 1 to 30, main file volume 1, and appendices 1 to 6, pages 31 to 39, main file volume 1).
7. Regarding the criminal complaint, which was commented on by Viviane Fischer in a largely correct manner
Even a cursory glance at the 30-page criminal complaint shows that its substance is no different from the first attempt by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution to take Dr. Fuellmich out of circulation ("Think of something, prosecutor, maybe fraud or embezzlement – we are the Office for the Protection of the Constitution and we are hunting a lateral thinker").
The facts of the case described by the complainants, which are also decisive for a criminal complaint, contain a lot of emotional whining and 14 accusations of "threats" – but no verifiable facts whatsoever. In short, there is no "viable factual basis" as required by the Federal Court of Justice in its established case law. Whining about the complainants' own irrelevance resulting from their own incompetence cannot replace such a viable factual basis for merely alleged criminal offenses.
A closer look at this criminal complaint (in the form of Viviane Fischer's comments on pages 164 to 179, main file volume 4) reveals the following:
Viviane Fischer allegedly commented on the content of the criminal complaint one and a half months after it was filed (she allegedly received the criminal complaint initiated by her and Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg in August 2022). It should be noted that she herself had initiated the filing of the criminal complaint at the instigation of Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, whose role remains unclear, by contacting the informants of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security in August 2022 and informing them of the email from Dr. Fuellmich dated August 26, 2022.State Security in August 2022 and informed them by handing over Dr. Fuellmich's email of August 26, 2022, that Dr. Fuellmich was in the process of repaying the loan. This marked the start of the Constitution Protection Agency's second attempt to take Dr. Fuellmich out of circulation. For the sake of simplicity, reference is made below to the pagination of Viviane Fischer's commentary on the criminal complaint:
Justus Hoffmann begins the criminal complaint he drafted with the sentence:
"The witnesses Antonia Fischer and Dr. Justus Hoffmann, together with the witness Viviane Fischer, attorney at law, and the accused Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, founded the Corona Committee, a kind of video podcast (...) in the summer of 2020."
This introductory statement, which misrepresents the significance of Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, is incorrect. In fact, Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer, advised by Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg via Facetime, founded the Corona Committee in Berlin (as a BGB company) at the beginning of June 2020 on their own, without Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, who played no role whatsoever at that time. It was only about a month later, when Viviane Fischer decided to additionally found a UG (a type of limited liability company under German law), and after the scientists she had approached, Prof. Homburg and Prof. Hockertz, had dropped out, that – trusting Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab as the promoter of the so-called "Hafenanwälte" (port lawyers) – the two defendants, Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, were brought in as replacements for the two scientists who had dropped out. At that time, virtually no lawyers were willing to make any kind of public statement critical of the coronavirus measures.
Viviane Fischer adds a correction on page 165, main file volume 4:
"No, it is an investigative committee that not only operates online, but also collects information behind the scenes, networks, supports research projects, etc."
However, Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann had no idea about this, as they were not interested in or involved in the work of the Corona Committee in any way, but were only after the donations, as already explained and made even clearer by Viviane Fischer's comments. Justus Hoffmann then goes on to describe the activities of the Corona Committee, which he had just described to Viviane Fischer's indignation as "a kind of video podcast," as follows:
"(...) in which the four lawyers discussed the implications raised in the context of the Corona pandemic and interviewed scientific experts live on the events of the Corona pandemic and asked them for their assessment of the statements made by the federal government (sic). The original aim was to allow other voices to be heard and to hear dissenting scientific opinions on the usefulness of the Corona measures taken, and then to briefly classify these findings for the viewers from a legal perspective."
At least the defendant Justus Hoffmann correctly states this objective of the Corona Committee, as it was also communicated to viewers and donors, just as it was correctly recognized by Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke (see above). This correct objective, which also concerns the legal classification of the measures, is underlined by the regular participation of Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab in the work of the Corona Committee as its most important legal advisor.
The statement by senior public prosecutor Reinecke on June 14, 2022, is therefore entirely accurate when she said that the first attempt by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution to to remove Dr. Fuellmich from circulation with the help of a criminal offense to be invented by her (Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke) (according to the clearly recognizable request of the Constitutional Protection Agency/State Security Agency, which initiated the whole affair) on page 31, supplementary file volume 3:
"Moreover, it seems far-fetched that the donors would be concerned about the form of the foundation. It is more likely that they are interested in the content of the 'analysis of the overall situation' promised by the committee, which was clearly intended to condemn the government's coronavirus measures at the expense of personal freedoms. The parties involved (...) have complied and continue to comply with this announced activity to a considerable extent."
The complainants/informants of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security then emphasize the unpaid nature of the committee members' activities:
"It was clear to all those involved that their activities were exclusively unpaid, which was not only expressly emphasized in the broadcasts themselves, but also by the witness Viviane Fischer and the accused Dr. Reiner Fuellmich in particular. This was done on the basis of explicit internal agreements, also and precisely because it was to be avoided at all costs that the founders, participants, and guests of the 'committee' would act out of greed for profit and thus undermine the program's claim to transparency and truth."
The only thing that is correct here is that Viviane Fischer (Dr. Fuellmich never commented on this) emphasized in almost every broadcast that the employees of the Corona Committee were working free of charge and that the donations would be used exclusively for educational work. Internal agreements were made exclusively between the active members of the Corona Committee, i.e. between Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer, but not with the inactive and only sporadically attending complainants and accused parties Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, who usually disappeared before the end of the broadcast. The articles of association of the UG, founded on July 9, 2020, clearly state in § 2 (4):
"The company pursues exclusively and directly charitable purposes within the meaning of the section 'tax-privileged purposes' of the German Tax Code. The company acts selflessly and does not primarily pursue its own economic purposes. The company's funds may only be used for purposes in accordance with the articles of association. The shareholders do not receive any payments from the company's funds. No person may benefit from expenditures that are not related to the purpose of the company or from disproportionately high remuneration. Upon leaving the company, upon dissolution of the corporation, or upon discontinuation of tax-privileged purposes, the shareholders shall receive no more than their paid-in capital shares and the fair market value of their contributions in kind."
This means that if a shareholder leaves, they will only receive the $125 in founding capital they paid in. However, since this amount was never paid in, no payment would be made to a shareholder upon their departure. The next sentence shows once again that the complainants were either trying to distort the chronology or were simply too stupid to reproduce it correctly:
"To secure this circumstance, a non-profit UG was founded in August 2020 on the initiative of the witness Viviane Fischer."
This is doubly incorrect: First, the BGB company was already founded by Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer in early June 2020 as the Corona Committee. And secondly, although a UG was now also founded on the initiative of Viviane Fischer, this did not happen in August, but, as Viviane Fischer correctly points out, one day before the press conference on July 10, 2020, i.e. on July 9, 2020. And the UG founded by Viviane Fischer, but never registered, was not a non-profit organization at any time.
Justus Hoffmann then repeats several times in his criminal complaint that the work of the association should be carried out free of charge, and Viviane Fischer correctly notes:
"The donations were to be made available and used exclusively for the work of the committee." (Page 166, main file volume 4).
The defendant Justus Hoffmann then again describes in several respects incorrectly that and how accounts were kept for the Corona Committee. He claims that initially, attorney Tobias Weissenborn kept the account for the Corona Committee, then Dr. Fuellmich kept two or three accounts. In fact, Dr. Fuellmich had initially managed an account for the Corona Committee on a fiduciary basis (for only a few weeks) because the Corona Committee existed only as a BGB company, as founded by Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer in early June 2020, and therefore – but also because the UG founded by Viviane Fischer on July 9, 2020, never came into existence due to lack of registration – could not itself be the holder of a bank account. However, Dr. Fuellmich was unable to continue this because the account was closed on July 20, 2020, by Warburg Bank, which had taken over Dr. Fuellmich's house bank, Hallbaum Bank. At the same time, Warburg Bank filed a suspicious activity report, which, according to the analysis report of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security from the first attempt by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution to remove Dr. Fuellmich from circulation, ended up directly with the Office for the Protection of the Constitution (see again, page 1, supplementary file volume 3, main file). Only then did attorney Tobias Weissenborn make himself available and set up a donation account for the Corona Committee at Commerzbank, again on a fiduciary basis, but this was also immediately terminated due to alleged money laundering suspicions, so that from April 2021, Dr. Fuellmich, this time at Deutsche Bank, until this account was also closed due to alleged money laundering ( ) and then, from July or August 2021, Dr. Fuellmich held a trust account at DKB Bank until this account was also closed due to alleged money laundering and, as always, accompanied by a money laundering report to the state security/constitutional protection authorities.
From November or December 2021, Viviane Fischer then managed the donation account for the Corona Committee on a fiduciary basis at the Berliner Landesbank/Berliner Sparkasse in Berlin. Strangely, this account was never closed, and strangely, unlike the accounts previously managed on a fiduciary basis by Dr. Fuellmich and Tobias Weissenborn, it never triggered a report of suspected money laundering.
In May, after what Tobias Weissenborn referred to as the (see above) "rescue company" founded by Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich, with Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich as 50% shareholders and managing directors, had not only been established but also registered, Viviane Fischer set up a separate account for this company, which now also existed as a legal entity with legal capacity, the SCA IC UG. This also appeared on the Corona Committee's website, as did the name of this company, which had not only been founded but also actually came into existence through registration (all other companies had never appeared on the website).
The unincorporated association, which never came into existence and to which the complainants refer both in their criminal complaint and in their civil action (which they are also asserting in the criminal proceedings), never appeared under any name on the Corona Committee's website—this cannot be emphasized enough.
The complainants then begin to list allegations that are, without exception, false: On page 166 R, they first write:
"The witnesses Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann were at no time holders of account access and had no information whatsoever about the committee's incoming and outgoing payments."
This is incorrect, as Tobias Weissenborn already confirmed in the oral hearing. After Dr. Fuellmich's account was closed immediately after the first donations were received, Weissenborn managed an account on a fiduciary basis for the Corona Committee, as Jens Kuhn also confirmed during his questioning by the court. Jens Kun had managed and administered the accounts set up by Dr. Fuellmich on a fiduciary basis for the Corona Committee at Deutsche Bank and DKB Bank: Both complainants and defendants, Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, could have obtained information about the accounts and made payments at any time – at least until the summer of 2021 (specifically: August 2021) when Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich parted ways with both of them because the two complainants and defendants were only interested in the donations.
This fact is confirmed by the fact that the defendants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann would also have been informed about the account balances at any time and could also have issued payment instructions themselves at any time if they – contrary to what actually happened – had been interested or involved in the work of the Corona Committee in any way, including through the content of the minutes of the shareholders' meeting on October 5, 2022. This shareholders' meeting was convened by the complainants after they had joined forces with Viviane Fischer in August 2022 at the instigation of Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg in order to launch a joint smear campaign and witch hunt against Dr. Fuellmich starting on September 20, 2022. The purpose of the shareholders' meeting was to exclude Dr. Fuellmich as the face of the Corona Committee through the two V-men of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security and Viviane Fischer, who was also indirectly/directly controlled (see below for details), from the official, albeit completely insignificant and never-existent company for the work of the Corona Committee; cf. the correct assessment by Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke, as quoted above, regarding the insignificance of the UG.
At the latest since the attempt at a so-called "settlement agreement," with which the defendants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann wanted to obtain half of all donations at the end of December 2021, this company had finally failed, regardless of its lack of registration.
The aim of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security was to remove Dr. Fuellmich from circulation in a seemingly formally correct manner in a second attempt. This time, a criminal complaint was indeed the trigger for everything that followed. However, the whole thing was only formally correct, since this criminal complaint was only outwardly an initiative by shareholders, but in reality the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security was behind it.
The company on behalf of which the complainants claim to have acted had long since ceased to exist on September 2, 2022, namely since the expulsion of the two inactive replacements Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, who were only interested in donations, by Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich in August 2021. For this reason, due to the efforts of the complainants Antonia Fischer, Justus Hoffmann, and Marcel Templin, which were clearly aimed at the destruction and plundering of the Corona Committee, Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich had already founded SCA IC UG at the end of 2021 with the two partners/managing directors Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich as a "rescue company" (see again this wording in the email from Tobias Weissenborn dated November 25, 2021, page 196, main file volume 4). This SCA IC UG had replaced the failed UG with the two V-men from the Office for the Protection of the Constitution. In any case, according to the minutes of the shareholders' meeting, attorney Tobias Weissenborn responded on October 5, 2022, to Justus Hoffmann's accusation that he and Antonia Fischer had not been informed about the accounts or costs of the Corona Committee as follows:
"I don't understand why you didn't receive any money. You could have decided that yourselves. I was your contact person for matters relating to the account." (Page 4, main file volume 2).
This is exactly what is reflected in the evaluated email communication (see above): the complete inaction and lack of response on the part of the complainants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann during all communication with the active members of the " " (Corona Investigation Committee) Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer, as well as with Tobias Weissenborn.
Solely because of this absolute disinterest in the work of the Corona Committee, they (Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann) and their law firm partner Marcel Templin, as the third complainant, did not even notice that – after Tobias Weissenborn's account had also been closed and Dr. Fuellmich was again forced to hold two accounts for the Corona Committee in trust until they were also closed – Jens Kuhn had been hired as bookkeeper for the Corona Committee by Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich. For it was she alone, Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich, who ran the Corona Committee's business, while the two substitutes did absolutely nothing. This inaction and disinterest is also reflected in the sentence commented on by the complainants on page 166 R of the main file, volume 4, by Viviane Fischer:
"The registration of the company was significantly delayed (...) The witness Viviane Fischer was the one who handled this process for the company."
This was entirely correct, as Viviane Fischer comments:
"I handled it after no one else could be found. There is email correspondence to this effect."
There is indeed email correspondence specifically on this point (registration of the company). As already quoted above, the email correspondence evaluated on page 182 R, main file volume 4, clearly shows this, where Viviane Fischer asks:
"Who can take care of all the registration stuff (...)? Justus, what about our Facebook page? You wanted to take care of it (...) And what about the issue of 'deleting our video'? Justus, have you thought about that?"
As always, there was no response from either the defendant Justus Hoffmann or the defendant Antonia Fischer. Viviane Fischer's statement that she took over because no one else did is therefore correct. Incidentally, only the defendants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, as well as Viviane Fischer, were in Berlin at all, and thus in the vicinity of the notary Michelsburg, who ultimately accompanied the registration matters as a notary. Similarly, the two active partners/managing directors, Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich, also took care of everything else that needed to be arranged for the Corona Committee. This was done, for example, by Viviane Fischer hiring and paying Oval Media (for filming and livestreaming the program), but also for the creation of the website and the hiring and payment of an IT specialist in Poland, while Dr. Fuellmich ensured professional accounting, communication with donors and viewers, which was vital for the committee's survival, competent tax advice, and the hiring of a professional manager. he also ensured the international dissemination of the Corona Committee's work by giving an average of four to five interviews per week to Italians, French, Americans, Indians, English, Australians, Canadians, etc. on .
The tax problem mentioned by the complainants on page 167, main file volume 4, did not exist at any time (except as scaremongering by the "port lawyers," see below) and had been deliberately brought about by the three accused "port lawyers" by refusing to register the company. They write there:
"In mid-2021, around July, the witnesses Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann discussed that the lack of registration could lead to a tax law and liability problem: if the registration of the company failed, it would be a failed company, which would then have to be wound up. However, if the company continued to operate despite the lack of registration, this would lead to a GbR (civil law partnership), in which the partners would be liable for the company's liabilities as taxable income and, in particular, the income would be taxable for the partners (...) One quarter of the company's donations in each case."
As already stated, this apparent problem never existed, as Sigune Vahnauer, a tax advisor who is a friend of Jens Kuhn and was called in as a favor, explained free of charge to the Corona Committee. It also never arose later, as the two complainants and informants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann had to admit during their witness examination. What's more, it was brought about in the first place by the behavior of the two, as Viviane Fischer had already accused them of in an email dated December 25, 2021, in response to the attempted blackmail by Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann with the so-called "severance agreement":
"I see a problem of breach of trust if the registration is prevented, because according to unanimous opinion, only the company is the tax subject after registration at the latest. I see another problem in that the payment (possible circumvention?) violates the provisions of the articles of association (no money for work, no money upon departure). So is this just a matter of formality, and we are talking about 25% of nothing? But then why such an ambiguous contract?"
Once again, it is astonishing that Viviane Fischer still clearly stated at the end of 2021 – albeit in a strangely surprised tone – that the accused Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann were acting against the interests of the Corona Committee, and in any case against the corporate structure and the articles of association, yet nine months later she played a decisive role in destroying this very committee together with them.
But there is also an explanation for this strangely contradictory and self-damaging behavior on the part of Viviane Fischer, which will be discussed in more detail later.
The fact that Dr. Fuellmich would continue in November 2022 with his own format and with the help of his remaining funds, i.e., those not stolen by the complainants, under the name ICIC (International Crimes Investigative Committee) was not foreseeable on October 5, 2022, the day of the shareholders' meeting, either for the complainants or for Viviane Fischer. the day of the shareholders' meeting. At that time, they – or rather the state security/constitutional protection agency controlling them – still believed that they could prevent Dr. Fuellmich from continuing his international work through this formal maneuver and by demonetizing Dr. Fuellmich.
Viviane Fischer must also have assumed this, so that she – albeit misjudging the true facts – actually believed (as correctly stated by the BND in its assessment submitted to the court) that she could continue the work of the Corona Committee together with Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg without "its face," Dr. Fuellmich. In particular, she misjudged her own abilities, the charisma of her new partner Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, and above all their international significance and reach.
Again, as just explained, the next sentence of the complainants on page 167, main file volume 4, is wrong:
"Since Dr. Fuellmich was the sole shareholder who managed the income (...)"
In fact, Dr. Fuellmich had never managed these funds. At the very beginning, for a very short time, this task was performed (albeit reluctantly) by Ms. Loges, the law firm's accountant, followed by attorney Tobias Weissenborn and finally, until around August 2022, Jens Kuhn as accountant for the Corona Committee. As he also stated, Kuhn had carried out the instructions of the two active partners/managing directors, Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer, and would also have carried out those of the two accused informants, Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, if there had been any and if they had not remained virtually invisible and uninterested – at least until the two active partners/managing directors, Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer, informed him that the accused Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann were only interested in the donation money and had been informed by a dubious person that they should not be involved in the Corona Committee.Managing Directors Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer informed him that the accused Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann were only interested in the donation money and were being advised and accompanied by a dubious person whom Dr. Fuellmich (correctly) believed to be an informant for the state security/constitutional protection authorities – namely Jörn Böttcher. It is strange, however, that Viviane writes on page 167 R that she "did not have access to the documents herself" – at least "not really," as she evasively puts it, because she knows that this is not true. She was simply never interested in her mail from the Corona Committee or even in the Corona Committee's mailbox (which was identical to that of her law firm, neither of which she ever checked). This is the only way to explain why she was unaware of the foreclosure and account seizure measures taken by the landlord of her hobby hat shop for unpaid rent:
"I didn't have the documents. As Tobias writes in various emails, he put two copies of the account statement in Reiner's pigeonhole. I never received anything related to , just a few transfer forms and a rudimentary statement in March 2021 for the month of February/early March."
As Tobias Weissenborn explained, and as the secretary Nicole Winter, who has been named as a witness, will confirm, Dr. Fuellmich took all the bank statements that Tobias Weissenborn had prepared for him with him every time he traveled to Berlin for the Corona Committee's broadcasts. What sense would it have made to take the bank statements that Dr. Fuellmich had taken for Viviane Fischer with him, but then (at least in part) allegedly throw them away?
As explained by the complainants at the bottom of the same page, in August 2021, after a committee broadcast, a heated argument broke out between Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer on the one hand and the three complainants on the other (Marcel Templin had no business being there, as he was not a member of the Corona Committee, but he had always tried to convince Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer that he was a good replacement for the obviously mentally unstable defendant Justus Hoffmann).
Both Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich wanted nothing more to do with these complainants. This was partly because Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann – as documented by attorney Edgar Siemund with the help of statistics proving their participation in the broadcasts – had only participated sporadically from the outset, had shown no interest in the work of the Corona Committee, and – as became apparent during the heated debate – were only interested in the donation money.
On the other hand, Dr. Fuellmich had meanwhile learned from Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab and Antonia Fischer that Justus Hoffmann suffered from severe mental disorders. Dr. Fuellmich had also informed Viviane Fischer of this, as evidenced by the chat message of January 16, 2021 (page 7, self-reading folder 3):
"Justus is – according to Antonia yesterday – at the level of a twelve-year-old (please keep this confidential), his therapist apparently died recently and the new one has not yet started."
In the meantime, the internet activities of Justus Hoffmann and Antonia Fischer disclosed by the defense, in particular their murder threats against the defense, Dr. Fuellmich, journalists, and others, which are charged with sadistic-masochistic fantasies of violence, have shown how severely disturbed not only Justus Hoffmann is, but also Antonia Fischer. The fake internet identity they chose, "Dominatrix," says everything about both of them.
The fact that the complainants had already been recruited by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security at that point is also supported by the fact that all three had been completely unknown and unsuccessful until then (however, it should be emphasized once again that Antonia Fischer had been working for State Security in Berlin since her legal clerkship). Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann had both just lost their jobs at a law firm in Berlin and had responded by joining forces with Marcel Templin and launching with the help of advertising featuring the name of their sponsor, Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab, on their website, hoping to be able to work independently and generate income. Completely misjudging their capabilities (Justus Hoffmann was at times unable to pay his health insurance), they also launched their own competing event to the Corona Committee in August 2021 under the name "Maskforce," which failed almost immediately due to lack of interest. It is therefore difficult to imagine that their brazen behavior toward Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich would have been possible without the support of the state security/constitutional protection services.
Apart from that, a witness, Diana Seifert, told witness Roger Bittel and also attorney Wörmer that Justus Hoffmann had repeatedly boasted that he or all "port lawyers" were "protected by the highest authorities" in their hunt for Dr. Fuellmich. What else could this mean other than that the state security/constitutional protection services protected (and encouraged) them?
It is true that, as stated further in the criminal complaint on page 167 R below, Dr. Fuellmich accused the defendants Justus Hoffmann and Antonia Fischer, but also Marcel Templin, of having
"after the Corona Committee's money because they were economically dependent on it due to the mandates their public positions had given them."
Viviane Fischer agrees:
"I think Reiner said that they had benefited financially from the committee, which was also true. The two of them had allegedly received 10,000 euros a month from 'Eltern stehen auf' for a while (...)"
At the same time, however, she notes that Justus Hoffmann had in fact – contrary to the provisions of the statutes – been after the donation money:
"I believe that Justus had told Wolfgang (meaning Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, note by the signatory) shortly before that he wanted money for his presence on the committee."
On page 168, Viviane Fischer adds to this with the more than astonishing request by Justus Hoffmann that he wanted money for Viviane Fischer, who had transcribed the first 15 broadcasts of the Corona Committee, to make this work (which related to the interview work of Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich) available free of charge to viewers and donors:
"(...) I was just irritated that Justus only wanted to offer the book summarizing the first 15 meetings, which I had written and wanted to offer to viewers free of charge as an e-book, for a fee (nothing involving his name could be offered free of charge). I felt that the viewers had made the book possible through their donations, so it should also be available to them free of charge at . This was particularly absurd because I had done all the work on the book and Justus had contributed nothing, nor had the others."
The complainants then accuse Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer of only wanting to give them very limited information about the Corona Committee's income and expenditure situation and that Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer justified this during a subsequent mediation conference in the presence of Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab by saying
"(...) they were concerned that the tax advisor commissioned by the witnesses Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, the witness tax advisor Jörn Böttcher, would pass on the information received to third parties without authorization (...)"
This was exactly the case because Dr. Fuellmich (and probably also Viviane Fischer, after she had experienced the brazenly damaging behavior of the new tax advisor of the Berlin "Hafenanwälte" (port lawyers), Jörn Böttcher, in Hamburg, where the party "Die Basis" is based) was convinced that Jörn Böttner was working for the other side. Viviane Fischer commented on this – as always – cautiously or vaguely:
"In view of the fact that the committee appeared to be politically endangered, it seemed difficult that someone from the grassroots whom I could not place and whom Reiner described as an informer or at least as an opponent would be able to gain an overview of the economic situation and also of the employees, etc."
Justus Hoffmann then stated in a highly emotional and unprofessional manner, but essentially correctly, that Dr. Fuellmich, outraged by the brazen behavior of the complainants, who had become increasingly useless to the committee, declared that Viviane Fischer and he could also end their work with the complainants and found a new company.
It is true that at that very moment, Dr. Fuellmich had indeed come up with the idea of a new company without the money-hungry and useless troublemakers, which six months later was described by attorney Tobias Weissenborn as a "rescue company" (see page 169, main file volume 4).
Viviane Fischer comments on this in her usual vague manner, which is only half accurate:
"The idea here was set up a kind of management company with identical non-profit statutes that could temporarily finance the committee's further work so that the potential tax problems in the 'old company' would not become even greater and the ability to act would remain, because it was not foreseeable whether Justus and Antonia, who were not involved in the substantive work, would block decision-making processes and necessary payments of invoices."
Despite the vague wording, she clearly shows that she (just like Dr. Fuellmich) wanted to get rid of the defendants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, who were only interested in the donations and were actually damaging the work of the Corona Committee. She commented even more clearly on this later, at the beginning of June 2022, when she wrote to Dr. Fuellmich by email after the new company, the so-called "rescue company," had been registered (see above):
"Then we'll finally be rid of the old shitheads."
In fact, after the dispute in August 2021, the idea of a new company (a "rescue company") without Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann slowly began to take shape. Because of the concrete threat to the Corona Committee posed by the defendants Justus Hoffmann and Antonia Fischer and because of their greed for money, seven months later Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich founded the company SCA IC UG as a so-called "rescue company." With this company, Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich continued the work of the Corona Committee without Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, who had been attacking and attempting to plunder the Corona Committee and its work in a manner that was both disloyal and illegal—and they did so without Antonia Fischer or Justus Hoffmann, who had been aware of this the entire time, objected to this in any way or even took any action (civil injunctions or a simple lawsuit under company law would have been more than obvious).
And indeed, after this incident in August 2021, Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer parted ways with Justus Hoffmann and Antonia Fischer – and, of course, with Marcel Templin, who was not a member of the Corona Committee but constantly tried to push his way in. Because, as Viviane Fischer said to both of them at the end of the dispute: Their presence only led to a "bad atmosphere" during the work of the Corona Committee, which was carried out solely by Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich. Viviane Fischer therefore writes quite correctly (albeit mistakenly stating the date as one year earlier) on page 169 R at the bottom:
"The two had already disappeared long before, namely in August 2020" (meaning: from 2021, note by the signatory). In their last meeting with us – No. 69 – they tried to promote their own channel, "Maskforce," which, although it has a wide reach, Viviane Fischer considers failed or not very effective (note by the signatory). (...)"
Then, in the criminal complaint, the "port lawyers" try once again to justify their complete inactivity over more than a year (their "disappearance," as Viviane Fischer repeatedly calls it) with alleged "threats" (they claim a total of 14 times that Dr. Fuellmich threatened them) from Dr. Fuellmich and assert:
"Furthermore, in the event of their refusal to comply with his demands (however, only Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann had made any demands, note by the undersigned), together with Robert Cibis, the managing director of Oval Media, which produced the "committee," he would record a video in which he would (falsely) inform the public that the witnesses Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann were solely seeking to enrich themselves through the committee and, as "controlled opposition," wanted to damage the "resistance movement against the coronavirus measures."
In fact, Dr. Fuellmich had accused him of exactly that – pure greed combined with complete incompetence – and, as it has since transpired, he was right. However, he had not threatened to publish a video, but – as it subsequently transpired – had kept all internal disputes with the complainants and later also with Viviane Fischer away from the public eye for as long as possible (at least until Viviane Fischer, at the instigation of Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, she suddenly contacted the complainants again and then, starting on September 2, 2022, suddenly launched a coordinated public smear and defamation campaign against Dr. Fuellmich together with the complainants, while at the same time filing criminal charges). Once again, Viviane Fischer comments correctly on Justus Hoffmann's above statement:
"That's an incredible claim; I've never been told that. I would have asked Robert immediately if it was true. He would never have made a film like that. It's also not clear what kind of content could have been filmed. I can't see that anything happened here that could have been a reason for Justus and Antonia to stop managing the company's affairs. I remember Reiner saying something about a bomb going off, but that was in his usual style—a deliberately energetic manner that left it completely unclear what such a bomb could even be. Something about the presentation of the story must be wrong here. In a personal conversation after the report was filed, the two claimed that this threat had been made at the notary's office. I said that I had no recollection of this and that it could only have been said when I was briefly in the restroom (at the notary's office; I had not been in the restroom at the café), that they no longer knew whether I had been there or not, but had emphasized beforehand that I had definitely been there. Furthermore, they had not been able to tell me what exactly Robert had wanted to film. They only said that Robert had wanted to make a nasty film about them. But now Böttcher had jogged their memory, so the alleged incident must have taken place at the notary's office. I cannot confirm this either. I was in the restroom for two minutes. But this whole extreme situation cannot have taken place there. A threat, the content of which I don't even remember properly and for which there was no tangible substance, cannot have been that serious. What is also confusing in this context is that Justus Hoffmann later wrote to me that he couldn't remember the content of the threat. At that point, the criminal complaint listing everything had already been filed. The information that he later said Jörn Böttcher had helped him remember must have already been known to him at the time of our conversation."
But Viviane Fischer did not limit herself to clarifying that Justus Hoffmann had apparently made things up for the criminal complaint. She also provides an explanation for the constant – false – talk of "threats" by Justus Hoffmann in the criminal complaint (page 169 R main file volume 4):
"In my opinion, this is likely to be a protective claim to justify the socially problematic inaction despite alleged suspicions of unauthorized dispositions."
In fact, she addresses the core problem: This is a purely corporate law dispute, which the complainants could no longer pursue under corporate law because they had not only remained completely inactive for more than a year, but also because they had been interested only in the donations and had otherwise only hindered the work of the Corona Committee.
But then the complainants and the accused "port lawyers" go even further and claim:
"In addition, both (meaning Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, note by the undersigned) assume that if a corresponding video is published on the Internet, threats or violence against them will be carried out by the crowd of his followers incited by the accused Dr. Reiner Fuellmich."
Viviane Fischer also comments on this correctly:
"They could never have believed that. What could the content of this film have been?"
And indeed, the events that have since taken place have shown that both were acting by way of projection: They accused Dr. Fuellmich of what they themselves intended to do, namely inciting people to murder the defense and Dr. Fuellmich, without having even the slightest evidence to support this. The fact that the defendants Schindler, John, Dr. Jakob, and Luther did the same is shown by the fact that Dr. Fuellmich was subjected to so-called "white torture" (see above and again in detail below) for more than six months without there being even the slightest reason for this, let alone any justification, except for documents invented and falsified by the defendants themselves.
And indeed, the events that have since taken place have shown that both were acting by way of projection: what they themselves intended to do, namely to incite people to murder the defense and Dr. Fuellmich, they accused Dr. Fuellmich of doing, without having even the slightest evidence to support this. The fact that the defendants Schindler, Jung, Dr. Jakob, and Luther proceeded in exactly the same way is demonstrated by the fact that Dr. Fuellmich was subjected to so-called "white torture" for more than six months without there being even the slightest reason for this, except for allegations invented by the defendants themselves.
Further down on the same page, Justus Hoffmann and Antonia Fischer again claim that they refrained from "asserting their claims to information in court," which would have been the obvious thing to do, because of the threats that were made. And Viviane Fischer comments on this again:
"I cannot believe that."
And then Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann brazenly claim:
"They (meaning the accused Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, note by the undersigned) also withdrew completely from the public sphere of the committee and no longer participated in the internet broadcasts."
Viviane Fischer then clarifies, as already noted above:
"The two had already disappeared long before that, namely in August 2020 (meaning 2021, note by the signatory)."
On page 170 above, the accused Justus Hoffmann then invents another reason to accuse Dr. Fuellmich of making a threat:
"Shortly thereafter, the accused Dr. Fuellmich and the witness Viviane Fischer invited Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann to a company meeting, where they again urged them to participate in the registration of the company. The witness Justus Hoffmann and the witness Antonia Fischer then added to the agenda of the company meeting the withdrawal of the shares of the two other shareholders due to the threats made by the accused Dr. Fuellmich and his now openly anti-Semitic statements in public."
Apart from the fact that the request of Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, who are completely useless to the Corona Committee, to oust the only two active members and founders of the Corona Committee is absurd and can only be explained by the apparent power given to Justus Hoffmann by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/state security, this further assertion is not only obviously false and completely unsubstantiated, but also a threat. That is why Viviane Fischer writes:
"That's not true. Reiner has never said anything anti-Semitic, and Justus Hoffmann has also mentioned the Holocaust very often."
When Justus Hoffmann then completes the sentence by referring specifically to Dr. Fuellmich's allegedly anti-Semitic statements and writes:
"(...) which, in particular, has become unacceptable to him and society due to the ethnic origin of the witness Justus Hoffmann,"
Viviane Fischer again comments clearly and unequivocally that Justus Hoffmann was in no way interested in the society that he and the other complainants had torpedoed and that this accusation was obviously absurd, especially since Justus Hoffmann's ethnic origin was unknown to anyone at the time (he was allegedly an Ashkenazi Jew, as he has since declared in court). Viviane Fischer writes specifically on this point:
"What is Justus' ethnic origin? This has never been an issue."
The complainants then continue by claiming—again in a completely unprofessional and emotionally charged manner that is not in line with legal practice—that Dr. Fuellmich in particular fell into an "angry orgy of despair" and "shouted" when Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann brought the following to the company meeting (note: contrary to company law, cf. page 196 R of the main file, volume 4, comment by attorney Tobias Weissenborn) brought to the company meeting by Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, Dr. Fuellmich had fallen into an "angry orgy of despair" and had "shouted, lamented, and begged" for the company to finally be registered. Viviane Fischer also clarifies this on page 170 R, main file, volume 4:
"That's not true at all. Reiner and I had been in Hamburg the weekend before the meeting because the state association had called us for help. The board, of which Jörn Böttcher was a member, had attracted attention through insults and threats against members/other board members. Jörn Böttcher had also made nasty remarks to the board members. When the insults were read out on stage, the Hamburg board chair stood next to Böttcher and both of them cheered about the insults. It was a frightening scene; there is a recording of the entire event. The fact that Böttcher, of all people, was then given access to the committee's internal documents – on the number of employees and IT – could actually play into the hands of our political opponents. The question of how many people work at the committee is important information in itself."
Without having formulated a single verifiable criminal charge up to this point, the complainants remain true to their line of making completely false and/or vague "action movie accusations" and write again without even attempting to formulate any basis in fact:
"At this point, the witnesses realized for the first time that the accused Dr. Fuellmich and the witness Viviane Fischer were not withholding the documents out of fear of the greed of the witnesses Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann or because they had not been properly kept, but because the funds had been used for their own purposes in violation of company law."
Apart from the audacity of these completely unsubstantiated allegations by the complainants, who are utterly useless from every point of view, the complainants are guilty of lacking any semblance of "viable factual basis" for these allegations, which were made at random and, as has since become apparent, are completely false. However, they themselves had previously fueled such rumors about the private use of allegedly embezzled donations, as Viviane Fischer immediately clarifies:
"I suspect they already had this suspicion beforehand. At some point, it was also said that Reiner was building himself a villa, and this information seemed to come from Justus and Antonia (...) To this day, I know nothing about a villa, and why shouldn't a homeowner renovate his garden to a reasonable extent? Reiner made a very liquid impression on everyone."
Once again, the complainants claim they cannot explain why Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer did not want to hand over documents for inspection to Jörn Böttcher, whom Dr. Fuellmich suspects of being an undercover agent for the German domestic intelligence service. Viviane Fischer writes correctly:
"That's not true. I always emphasized the IT aspect. In my view, it was a maximum squeeze due to the (contrary to company law, see above, note by the signatory) involvement of the really very aggressive tax advisor (...)"
With reference to the complainants' statement on page 171 above, Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer had declared that
"Jörn Böttcher has sinister intentions and therefore the documents cannot be handed over, as he would then pass them on to unknown third parties,"
Viviane Fischer explains, again accurately:
"That was our fear."
She, too, had correctly assessed Jörn Böttcher, although she did not express it as clearly as Dr. Fuellmich, but instead beat around the bush as usual. And so it goes on: Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann then complain that Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich did not respond to their suggestion that Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab be allowed to examine and assess the documents. Viviane Fischer explains that Justus Hoffmann had also made false and unsubstantiated accusations against her outside the criminal complaint and afterwards:
"In an email to me in 2023, Justus wrote something about alleged payments to the grassroots and that he could not say anything more about it due to client confidentiality (which is obvious nonsense, since Viviane Fischer, as a lawyer, is also bound by professional secrecy, note by the signatory) (...) Incidentally, I am not aware of any payments to the grassroots. (...)" (This refers to the alleged transfer of donations to the party "die Basis," note by the signatory.)
After Justus Hoffmann then also states—correctly, for once—that Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich had explained to him that his tax considerations were completely without substance and incorrect, as they had been explained to them by a tax advisor, Viviane Fischer writes:
"That's also part of it. We actually had a Zoom meeting with Sigune Vahnauer (tax advisor who had provided a consultation with Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich free of charge, purely as a favor to the Corona Committee, note by the signatory), who says that the whole thing about the tax debt is nonsense. Against this background, the whole thing seemed like fear-mongering to me."
And that is exactly what it was, as has since been established. Incidentally, an experienced employee of the Braunschweig Main Customs Office named André Bruns has also recognized that Justus Hoffmann and his colleagues consistently work with baseless and false accusations. On July 27, 2023, in a communication to the accused John, he clearly and unambiguously writes about Justus Hoffmann's fabricated allegations of alleged "bogus self-employment" in Dr. Fuellmich's law firm (page 100, main file volume 3):
"No evidence for the assertion/assumption made can be found in the criminal complaint itself or in the subsequent correspondence."
And this content of the criminal complaint, which was so aptly described as baseless chatter not only by Bruns but also by Viviane Fischer, formulated by a lawyer who would have failed the state bar exam without the help of his mentor Prof. Dr. Schwab and who had only received his license in 2019, is supposed to have gone unnoticed by everyone else? Neither the – admittedly inexperienced – probationary public prosecutor and defendant John nor the experienced presiding judge and defendant Schindler? Neither defendant is supposed to have noticed that something was wrong? Only the police investigator Spörhase is said to have noticed something and therefore wanted to hear the complainants and Viviane Fischer as witnesses (page 135, main file volume 1). Otherwise, only customs investigator Mr. Bruns from the main customs office is said to have noticed that Justus Hoffmann was making unsubstantiated and therefore unverifiable claims? No, both the accused John and the accused Schindler knew that this criminal complaint was a commissioned job by the accused "port lawyers" for the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security. After all, they also received their orders from the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security.
This is precisely why it was imperative to prevent Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke, who was actually responsible for this case and who on June 14, 2022, had resoundingly rejected the first attempt by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution to remove Dr. Fuellmich from circulation because of his completely legal Corona information work, from doing so again. This is clearly demonstrated by the public prosecutor's file, albeit incomplete. It should also be noted that the judicial hearing of evidence, which began in January 2024 and had been limited to the public prosecutor's list of witnesses, was abruptly and completely terminated by the State Security Service on May 3, 2024, in a move that was both surprising and grossly unlawful, particularly given that the witnesses listed there, Jörn Böttcher and Marcel Templin, were no longer available.State Security on May 3, 2024, and that the witnesses listed there, Jörn Böttcher and Marcel Templin, were no longer heard, let alone that witnesses for the defense were allowed to refute the new allegations.
This stinks to high heaven and can only be explained by the fact that employees, i.e., in particular, undercover agents of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security, must tell the truth when asked about their activities for the Office for the Protection of the Constitution. Therefore, they must not be put in a position where they can be questioned, especially not by an experienced lawyer.
8. To eliminate senior public prosecutor Reinecke
In any case, this is also relevant: The second attempt by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security to remove Dr. Fuellmich from circulation because of his Corona educational work, this time with the help of the criminal complaint filed by the "Hafenanwälte" (port lawyers), was also presented to the senior public prosecutor Reinecke, who was actually responsible. A handwritten note by senior public prosecutor Dr. Rau dated October 7, 2022 (main file, volume 1, page 64) reads as follows regarding senior public prosecutor Reinecke:
"Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke, m. d. B. (i.e., 'with the request,' note by the signatory) submit for review for registration (lawyer's matter)."
Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke responded to this with the following handwritten note dated October 17, 2022 (main file, volume 1, page 164):
"WV (= resubmission, note by the signatory) with 400 Js 15414/22."
In other words, she wanted to make sure that nothing had changed in the meantime (since her rejection on June 14, 2022, of the first attempt by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security to remove Dr. Fuellmich from circulation because of his Corona awareness work). After Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke, who had of course been presented with this file, had taken a close look at this second attempt by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security to silence Dr. Fuellmich because of his Corona work, and had compared it with the first attempt that had failed, she must have noticed that absolutely nothing had changed compared to the first attempt.
For just as in the first attempt by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security presented to her, Mr. Schmelter from the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security had – again – submitted to her – again – the analysis report dated February 15, 2022 (which had no criminal relevance whatsoever, as she herself had determined, but which was accompanied by a series of references to the Corona educational work, the "Querdenker" scene, and the "conspiracy theorist" scene. Schmelter did this by presenting her with an almost completely identical cover letter, this time dated October 6, 2022 (pages 79 to 82 of the file). Once again, the subject line clearly states in bold print that it concerns
"Relevance to national security"
. Again, on page 2 of the report (sheet 80, main file volume 1) concerning Dr. Fuellmich, it is stated:
"– Person involved at www.corona-ausschuss.de"
and
"– Federal Executive Committee of the Grassroots Democratic Party of Germany" (since 12/21),
And again, on the third page (page 81, main file volume 1), reference is made to the key role played by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution:
"For your information, I would like to inform you that the analysis report (...) has been forwarded to the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (...) Other domestic public authorities have (...) not been informed."
And the letter ends again with a reference to the
"prohibition on the disclosure of information"
(page 82, main file volume 1).
Otherwise, the original analysis report dated February 15, 2022, is simply handed over again with the words:
"My analysis report dated February 15, 2022" (page 79 of the main file, volume 1).
Otherwise, absolutely nothing has changed.
Admittedly, a criminal complaint had now been filed by the three undercover agents of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution, which will be discussed in more detail below. However, these primarily relate to the two criminal offenses that the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security had already requested the Göttingen Public Prosecutor's Office to prosecute in its first attempt to remove Dr. Fuellmich from circulation, namely, under point 1, breach of trust, and under point 2, fraud (page 2 of the criminal complaint and page 2 of the main file, volume 1).
It should be noted that this was precisely the direction in which the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security had already suggested the first time around, or rather, it had asked the public prosecutor's office – in a not very subtle manner – to investigate and bring charges.
In this regard, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security stated at the bottom of page 16 of the supplementary file, volume 3, with the first analysis report by Mr. Schmelter dated February 15, 2022, that "it cannot be ruled out" that the transactions described in the analysis report (= account evaluation, note by the undersigned) involving Dr. Fuellmich
"could constitute the criminal offense of fraud or embezzlement."
.
Of course, this was not sufficient for a criminal investigation, but only for what is known in Anglo-American law as a "fishing expedition," i.e., a (haphazard) attempt to catch something. Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke had nevertheless conducted extensive preliminary investigations and then refused to initiate a genuine criminal investigation in the first place because nothing criminally relevant could be identified. She then instructed the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security that it was not the task of the public prosecutor's office to invent criminal offenses on command without any solid factual basis.
However, at that time, she had investigated allegations of embezzlement and fraud against the donors. This time, however, in their second attempt, the complainants had asserted and reported both offenses ("fraud" and "embezzlement") against the "Corona-Ausschuss-Vorschalt-UG." All other allegations made by these complainants in an amateurish manner were so baseless and nonsensical that even the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security and the public prosecutor's office under its control, which was on probation, did not pursue them further.
However, senior public prosecutor Reinecke immediately and without further ado concluded from the new file presented to her that no damage to a Corona Committee Preliminary UG could be considered, because contrary to the information provided by the complainants, no such UG existed. Once again, the public prosecutor's office in Göttingen – this time acting through public prosecutor Riemann – had forwarded the files to the public prosecutor's office in Berlin by order of September 6, 2022, precisely because the main charge ultimately pursued by the accused John concerned damage to an UG based in Berlin:
"Forward for review of transfer, because the alleged acts are said to have been committed to the detriment of the 'Corona-Ausschuss-Vorschalt-UG,' which, according to its articles of association, should have its registered office in Berlin (...)" (page 60 of the main file, volume 1).
However, as was also evident from the file submitted here, the Berlin Public Prosecutor's Office had sent the files back to Göttingen because, contrary to the once again untrue allegations made by the complainants, no such UG existed at all. The order rejecting the transfer of the case and returning the files to Göttingen dated October 7, 2022, states on page 69 of the main file, volume 1:
"Jurisdiction over the scene of the crime based on the registered office of the company 'Corona-Ausschuss-Vorschalt-UG' cannot exist for the sole reason that this company was never legally capable due to its lack of registration."
But how, every clear-thinking person and public prosecutor will ask, can a company be the victim of a crime if that company does not even exist?
Apparently to ensure that she had not overlooked anything, Senior Public Prosecutor Sudan wanted to have the files she had set aside concerning the first attempt by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution to remove Dr. Fuellmich from circulation because of his work on Corona presented to her again, and therefore ordered on October 19, 2022 (see above: page 64, main file volume 1):
"WV (= resubmission, note by the signatory) with 400 Js 15414/23."
As noted above, this refers to the file number of the first attempt by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution to take action against Dr. Fuellmich, which she had set aside. Under normal circumstances, a further note from Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke would now have been expected, either to the effect that there were now completely new circumstances that would require the opening of a criminal investigation, or that nothing had changed since her decision to dismiss the case on June 14, 2022, and that investigations for damage to a non-existent company were not possible.
Instead, however, the senior public prosecutor Reinecke, who is actually responsible, recently disappeared from the file without a trace after her note dated October 19, 2022. Instead, senior public prosecutor Rau of the Lower Saxony State Criminal Police Office (to the Göttingen public prosecutor's office???) ordered on November 1, 2022, that the public prosecutor's office's investigation file number be changed so that the accused John, who had just been transferred from Hanover to Göttingen, would receive it:
"The proceedings will be transferred to department 1504."
9. The interrogation of the "port lawyers" ordered by police investigator Spörhase but omitted by the accused John and Viviane Fischer
And then, on November 4, 2022, the accused John suddenly appears in the file for the first time and orders that the account analysis (already carried out by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution!) be carried out again, presumably because, as a "prosecutor on probation," he can't think of anything better to do.
Before going into the further content of the criminal complaint filed by the complainant, it should be noted once again that the police investigator Spörhase, who was in charge of the police investigation, stated on the same day, November 4, 2022, in his "report" on page 135, sheet 1 of the main file:
"On November 4, 2022, Detective Köhler and the undersigned were summoned to the offices of the Göttingen Public Prosecutor's Office by Senior Public Prosecutor Laue (who is the prosecutor who has since gained notoriety in the "60 Minutes" program on CBS in the USA, who, together with prosecutors Meininghaus and Dr. Link, who were deliciously amused by the fact that officers of a special task force kicked down the doors of completely normal people in the early hours of the morning, note by the undersigned) and the public prosecutor in charge of the case, Mr. John, were briefed on the facts of the case. After evaluating the account overview received, the complainants and the witness Viviane Fischer are to be questioned in addition by Mr. John, the prosecutor, as witnesses."
Given the obviously amateurish and childish quality of the completely unsubstantiated criminal complaint, it was indeed necessary to question the complainants and Viviane Fischer, who initiated the criminal complaint. It was all the more necessary to question these individuals in order to clarify who was telling the truth. The baseless criminal complaint, which accused Dr. Fuellmich of making 14 serious threats, was filed by the complainants or by Dr. Fuellmich, whose email of August 26, 2022, to Viviane Fischer regarding the loan repayment mentioned therein had prompted the complainants and the Office for the Protection of the Constitution to rush into action in the first place?
Of course, Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke would then have conducted the witness interview recorded by Spörhase and, as required by the Code of Criminal Procedure, she would also have granted the accused Dr. Fuellmich a legal hearing. But it was precisely to prevent this that the accused John was brought in as a young and inexperienced prosecutor on probation and senior public prosecutor Reinecke was forced out of the proceedings.
The criminal complaint continues with a brief skirmish about whether the tax advisor Ms. Vahnauer was the tax advisor of the Corona Committee or had merely informed Jens Kuhn, Viviane Fischer, and Dr. Fuellmich about the lies in the complaint regarding alleged tax problems as a favor. However, in the absence of any substance for a credible criminal charge, the complainants immediately retreat to the umpteenth repetition of the accusation that Dr. Fuellmich made threats. On page 172, middle, main file volume 4, the complainants write in their usual manner that they have now really developed a solid suspicion of criminal offenses committed by Dr. Fuellmich in order to once again excuse their continued complete inaction with alleged threats by Dr. Fuellmich:
"Against this background, the situation did not develop further for several months. The witnesses Antonia Fischer, Justus Hoffmann, and Jörn Böttcher were now certain that the funds were being used for purposes contrary to the contract. However, the witnesses Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann refrained from taking further steps because they feared that the accused Dr. Fuellmich would carry out his threats."
Once again, Viviane Fischer comments correctly:
"As I said, that cannot be true."
However, since the complainants are well aware of how insubstantial and thin their written complaints were up to that point, they add:
"Since he (Dr. Fuellmich, note by the undersigned) also enjoys considerable influence among 'the grassroots' due to his position as a member of the party's federal executive committee, he has a large and loyal following in the '' and that, in the opinion of witnesses Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, this milieu began to radicalize rapidly in large parts due to the influence of the accused Dr. Fuellmich, it was feared that the accused Dr. Fuellmich would go beyond his previous threats and possibly call for violence against them. Directly or indirectly."
Viviane Fischer comments on this again, quite accurately, as follows:
"That's not true at all."
and
"What nonsense."
At this point, it should also have been noticeable that these informants for the Office for the Protection of the Constitution were now even using the diction of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution by describing the Corona Committee, the Die Basis party, and Dr. Fuellmich as the "milieu of the lateral thinking scene," which had "radicalized" and was now "calling for violence," and Dr. Fuellmich as an "anti-Semite." Apart from that, with today's irrefutable knowledge of the serious mental disorders of Justus Hoffmann in particular and the now disclosed death threats made by the complainants, which are underpinned by sexually sadistic fantasies, it can be concluded that the complainants' fabrications are psychologically what are known as "projections."
However, one thing strikes Viviane Fischer, namely that the complainants had not only failed to put any substance on paper for any of the crimes with which they sought to incriminate Dr. Fuellmich, but had also deliberately attempted to blackmail Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich with the "settlement agreement" allegedly drafted by Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab to extort half of the donation assets. to blackmail Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich out of half of the donation assets with the "settlement agreement" allegedly drafted by Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab had been deliberately omitted. She therefore writes on page 172, following the complainants' constantly repeated threatening talk, which obviously got on her nerves:
"The settlement agreement has been omitted here, which seemed to be Justus and Antonia's way of trying to get their hands on the committee's assets. This fits in very well with the conversation Wolfgang had with Justus, in which Justus was angry and wanted money for his work on the committee. It was clear to me that, at least in the severance settlement proposal, it was definitely not just about taxes. The intangible assets were also to be compensated by a payment. These do not have to be taxed at all. It was also structured in such a way that it would ultimately have been up to Justus and Antonia to decide whether to make the money available to the company or perhaps to someone else after taxation. How could the work have continued with these waiting periods? I then asked why Justus would draw up such an ambiguous contract when it was clear that, according to the articles of association, each of us was only entitled to our contribution. He then wrote something about our breach of trust, saying that he did not want this to become public (paraphrased). I asked him to tell us what he knew, but received no response. Reiner and I did not accept this proposal. We were also somewhat shaken."
Viviane Fischer, who was sometimes astonishingly disoriented, did not remember this correctly. It was not Justus Hoffmann who blackmailed Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich for allegedly acting in bad faith. Rather, it was Viviane Fischer who had described Justus Hoffmann's blackmail attempt and its prelude as acting in bad faith. Justus Hoffmann had merely made a crude attempt at blackmail and issued threats in an email dated December 29, 2021 (page 51, self-reading folder I):
"It's actually quite simple: if you want to get us out of this mess (= from the company that does not formally exist, note by the undersigned), (...) then that is the price that must be paid. There is no other way."
This was preceded by an indignant email from Viviane Fischer in response to the blackmail attempt by Justus Hoffmann and Antonia Fischer. In that email, Viviane Fischer writes (page 52, self-reading folder I):
"I see a problem of breach of trust if the registration is prevented, because according to unanimous opinion, only the company is the tax subject after registration at the latest. And I see a further problem ( ) in that the payment (possible circumvention?) violates the provisions of the articles of association (no money for work, no money upon leaving)."
Viviane Fischer had apparently confused this fact when commenting on Justus Hoffmann's own criminal offences, which he had concealed in his criminal complaint. It should also be emphasized that the cooperation with Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann as replacements for the two professors who had left was based exclusively on the trust that Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich had in their mentor, Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab. This was also clear to those who filed the complaint. Justus Hoffmann, in particular, who due to his mental health issues never appears without mentioning big names (so-called "name-dropping"), was well aware of this. Not only did he refer to Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab eight times (!) in the brief severance proposal, but he also wrote in his email dated December 23, 2021, that the severance agreement had been worked out by him together with Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab:
"I recently spoke to Martin on the phone and discussed with him how the whole thing (meaning the long-standing separation of Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann by Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer, note by the undersigned) could look. On this basis, we have now drawn up a severance agreement which, in our view and in Martin's view, represents a satisfactory solution that adequately protects the interests of all parties involved. This arrangement is also the most favorable for all of us from a tax perspective, as severance payments are special income and, due to our self-employment (meaning: as lawyers, note by the signatory), we have a great deal of control over our remaining income—that is, when we pay out our profits."
Apart from the "name dropping," Justus Hoffmann clearly shows here that he is not at all concerned with the work of the Corona Committee, but only with obtaining "income," which he was unable to do by any other means than blackmail, as he has always been and remains unsuccessful as a lawyer.
Viviane Fischer's email response dated December 25, 2021, shows that in reality, no tax problems can arise for the Corona Committee because
"at the latest after registration, only the company itself and no longer the individual shareholders"
are required to pay tax on the Corona Committee's income, and that the profit now being pursued with the help of the "severance payment" to Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann constitutes a circumvention of the provisions of the statutes (which state: "No money for work, no money upon leaving," see above).
10. On the attempted extortion by Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann with the help of the "severance settlement" allegedly co-authored by Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab and on the company law background
At this point, it is time to take a closer look at the so-called "severance agreement" with which the complainants sought to solve their financial problems and generate income. This is because the attempt to extort donations in December 2021 confirms, at the very latest, the termination or withdrawal from the company by Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann in August 2021.
The severance settlement can be found on pages 46 to 49 of self-reading folder I. It proves that it was also completely clear to the complainants Justus Hoffmann and Antonia Fischer that they had not only long since left the work of the Corona Committee (namely since August 2021 at the latest, as Viviane Fischer correctly states on page 169 R and in main file volume 4), but the severance settlement also confirms that since then they have also, by implied termination or implied resignation because they wanted to run their own format called "Maskforce" (and actually did so until this format failed shortly thereafter) from the never registered and thus never established company, the UG. The settlement agreement thus confirms that they have not been able to assert any claims under company law since August 2021 because this was already excluded by the company's articles of association and because the company in which they held shares (the failed preliminary UG) had no assets.
Justus Hoffmann and Antonia Fischer had been aware of all this since August 2021, as evidenced by the name they chose for their extortion attempt (the "settlement agreement") and its heading, i.e., the names of the persons involved in the "settlement agreement."
First, the name and the heading prove that Justus Hoffmann and Antonia Fischer (and Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab, if he, as Justus Hoffmann claims, helped draft this "settlement agreement") knew in December 2021, when this extortion attempt was launched, that Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann had long since, namely since August 2021, which in August 2021 existed only as a pure BGB company because it had not been registered as a UG. This is because during the open dispute between Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich on the one side and the three "Hafen lawyers" on the other in August 2021, it had become apparent that the "Hafen lawyers," especially Justus Hoffmann, were only interested in the donation money, even though Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann had not been involved in any way in the work of the Corona Committee or the Society for the Corona Committee and, on top of that, had only been present sporadically at its broadcasts. That is why Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer kicked them out at the end of the dispute, and they have indeed "disappeared" since then, as Viviane Fischer writes in her commentary on the criminal complaint (see above). After that, or at the same time, they founded their own competing event to the Corona Committee, which they called "Maskforce." However, this venture failed after a short time due to a lack of public interest. And then, in November 2021, when Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich once again attempted to register the desired UG ( ), they suddenly reappeared (until then they had "disappeared") at the relevant shareholders' meeting, but only to torpedo it with the help of the dubious Jörn Böttcher from Hamburg, whom they had brought along in violation of company law, and to prevent the registration once and for all.
Even before this expected renewed scandal caused by the behavior of Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, attorney Tobias Weissenborn had advised Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer by email to quickly establish a new company as a "rescue company" without Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann due to their behavior, which had already been disloyal and damaging to the company (see above). This is exactly what Viviane Fischer did in agreement with Dr. Fuellmich, who was in the US on business at the time, at the end of December 2021, by founding SCA IC UG with Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer as 50% shareholders/managing directors and ensuring that this UG was registered in May 2022, mind you: without Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann having anything to do with this UG. After that, Viviane Fischer was very happy about their final "sidelining" and emailed Dr. Fuellmich:
"And finally, we're rid of the old farts."
The fact that this happened at exactly the right time is proven by the "settlement agreement" presented shortly before by Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann to obtain half of the donation assets. If Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann had still been shareholders, i.e., if they had not already left the company in August 2021 as a result of the events described above (which, as it has since transpired, were not registrable), they would not have been able to present a "settlement agreement." Instead, as required by company law, they would have had to carry out a so-called "settlement" in accordance with § 730 or 738 BGB to divide the company's assets. However, this would not have been possible, not only because the breach of trust and conduct detrimental to the company by Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann would have prevented this, but also because the company's articles of association stipulated that none of the shareholders should be paid for their work on the Corona Committee, and above all because none of the shareholders were to receive any money after leaving the company, but rather the donations were to be used exclusively for the purpose for which they were intended (see the quotes from the articles of association below).
In addition, however, the company (irrespective of the fact that it was not a UG but remained a BGB company) had no assets to distribute in the event of a dispute. As Viviane Fischer correctly informed the court through her lawyer: Until the establishment of SCA IC UG in May 2022, the donations had always been paid into lawyers' escrow accounts (first by Dr. Fuellmich, then by Tobias Weissenborn, then again by Dr. Fuellmich, and finally, for six months until SCA IC UG was finally established, by Viviane Fischer). Dr. Fuellmich, Tobias Weissenborn, and Viviane Fischer had always held the money in these escrow accounts in trust for the donors, since, until the establishment of SCA IC UG, there was no UG with its own legal personality that could have had its own account.
Therefore, after Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann left in August 2021—quite independently of the fact that Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, as shareholders who had acted in breach of trust and damaged the company, were in any case not entitled to make any claims in good faith—no "distribution" of the company's assets was possible for two reasons:
a) because the company's articles of association stipulate that none of the shareholders receive any money for their activities and will not receive any money after leaving the company, and
b) because the company did not have any assets anyway, but rather the donations were held in trust in lawyers' accounts for the donors until the establishment of SCA IC UG.
And that is why Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann do not refer to their extortion attempt as a "settlement" or "settlement agreement," but as a "severance agreement," just as they refer to themselves in this "settlement agreement" in the so-called rubrum as "creditors" who have long since (namely since August 2021) been outside the company and refer to Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer, who manage the money in trust for the donors, as "third-party debtors." The case law and legal literature also establish that a company with no assets does not carry out a "settlement," i.e., a distribution of assets, upon the departure of one or more shareholders, see, for example, Palandt-Sprau, BGB Commentary, margin number 2 before § 723 with further references.
But where is the asset that was not used for the work of the Corona Committee (i.e., for technology, IT, communication, translators, etc.)? Well, it remains unclear to this day where the assets of the Corona Committee, which were managed solely by Viviane Fischer (in bad faith) from August 2022 onwards, have gone. However, Viviane Fischer repaid the loan money she had withdrawn in October 2022 to the account of SCA IC UG, which means that it is owned by this UG, which is 50 percent owned by Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich. The gold purchased for the Corona Committee is held by the Degussa company in Berlin, where it is stored, in accordance with the (presumably confused) wishes of Viviane Fischer, but for Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich, i.e., for the Corona Committee BGB company founded by Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich at the beginning of June 2020. In any case, no assets were ever owned by the failed company with Dr. Fuellmich, Viviane Fischer, Antonia Fischer, and Justus Hoffmann, nor are any assets owned by it today. And that is why Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann could never have been harmed by the loan withdrawals, which served to temporarily protect part of the donations from state access.
For further clarification regarding the articles of association of the (albeit failed) preliminary UG: As stated above, these articles of association not only stipulate, as Viviane Fischer has always emphasized, that none of the shareholders will receive any money upon their departure, § 2 (3) of the articles of association states:
"Upon their departure or upon dissolution of the corporation or upon cessation of tax-privileged purposes, the shareholders shall receive no more than their paid-in capital shares and the fair market value of their contributions in kind."
This means that the shareholders will not receive anything back, as they did not even pay in the 125 euros or make any contributions in kind.
However, § 13 of the articles of association clearly stipulates a permanent asset commitment regarding the assets available from donations in accordance with the purpose of the donation, even in the event of the dissolution of the company (page 44, self-reading folder I):
"In the event of the dissolution of the company or the discontinuation of tax-privileged purposes, the assets of the company shall fall to the 'Corona Committee Foundation' if it has been legally established as a tax-privileged entity, otherwise to a legal entity under public law or a tax-privileged entity for use in research projects and scientific work in the field of the coronavirus."
This means that, no matter what happens, the donated assets of the Corona Committee may only be used for the educational purposes specified in the statutes, in perpetuity, i.e., permanently.
The fact that this provision was immediately followed by a non-competition clause, which Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann brazenly violated by attempting to establish their rival event "Maskforce" in August 2021 (albeit unsuccessfully) immediately after this regulation was enacted, once again confirms their implicit withdrawal from the association or their implicit termination of the association.
In any case, there can be no reasonable doubt that the informants of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution, Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, not only withdrew from the work of the Corona Committee in July or August 2021, but also withdrew/terminated their membership of the company, which had already failed at that time, by implication.
At the very latest, the written attempt at a severance agreement confirms this, but also constitutes – once again – a termination or – once again – a departure of both informants.
From this point on, at the latest, there was no longer a company, but only the SCA IC UG, founded by Viviane Fischer at the end of 2021, which was then registered and listed on the Corona Committee's website with the two shareholders Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer, each holding 50 percent, and the Corona Committee BGB company, which had already been founded in early June 2020 by Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich.
11. The financial collapse of the "port lawyers" by August 2022 at the latest
In the criminal complaint, the complainants then deal with the fact that at the end of July/beginning of August 22, Viviane Fischer (at the instigation of Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, who testified on behalf of Viviane Fischer) suddenly contacted the complainants again and met with the two complainants, Justus Hoffmann and Antonia Fischer, in the presence of her lawyer Heublein.
Viviane Fischer writes on page 172 R of the main file, volume 4:
"I had called the two of them that evening at Jens's (referring to the sudden appearance of Viviane Fischer and her then partner Robert Siebes at the accountant Jens Kuhn's office to retrieve the Corona Committee's gold secured in Jens Kuhn's safe deposit box, note by the signatory), but could not reach them. In fact, I had first inquired about the state of their law firm because Reiner claimed they were bankrupt."
This was indeed the case. The continuing extreme psychological difficulties of Justus Hoffmann, who dominated the law firm of the so-called "Hafenanwälte" (port lawyers), had now led to the collapse of the law firm after Justus Hoffmann's previous breakdowns had been repeatedly compensated for with the help of Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab. Previously, Justus Hoffmann had not even been able to pay his health insurance contributions and, among other things, had sent the Corona Committee a completely exaggerated bill for legal services amounting to more than €18,000.
This desperate situation of the "Hafenanwälte" is reflected in their press release published in August 2022, which states in an irritatingly unprofessional manner:
"Dear mothers, dear fathers, dear grandmothers, dear grandfathers, and all other people who have sought help, words of encouragement, and our advice over the past two years,
we regret to inform you that due to current changes, we must suspend our work for the time being.
This applies to consultations, inquiries to our lawyers, and legal support in general, as well as our (actually written by Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab, note by the undersigned) very well-founded guidelines on important legal issues.
Everything that has been made available on the Maskforce channel to date can and should, of course, continue to be used by you as usual. We have been happy to be there for you and are working on being able to do so again soon with full force.
As stated in the criminal complaint against the "Hafenanwälte" ( ) for fraud, extortion, and other offenses, which has been pending since December 7, 2022 (and has been completely ignored by the Göttingen public prosecutor's office, public prosecutor John), and then supplemented in a criminal complaint for obstruction of justice in office against the accused John (which has been with the senior public prosecutor Dr. Studenroth since August 3, 2024, and has also been completely ignored by him), this strange behavior on the part of the collapsed "port lawyers" led to complete incomprehension among the (few) clients of these strange "port lawyers," who even the one and only secretary who had not immediately refused to take the job offered to her by the "port lawyers" out of fear had then run away in fear after about three weeks.
Some of the clients who had been let down turned to Dr. Fuellmich's law firm and asked if he was still working with these "port lawyers." This forced Dr. Fuellmich and his staff to clarify that they too had distanced themselves from these three lawyers due to their perceived complete incompetence, in order to prevent further damage to these and other potential clients.
The incredulous horror, not only at the collapse of the rule of law, but also at the "harbor lawyers," is also reflected in a "statement on their own behalf" by the only clients of the "harbor lawyers" from whom they had ever earned any money, according to Viviane Fischer's comment quoted above, namely the initiative "Eltern stehen auf e. V." (Parents Stand Up). This initiative brought together parents who, with the help of lawyers, wanted to protect their children from the psychologically and physically extremely harmful anti-corona measures.
Their statement is headlined: "Eltern stehen auf, e.V. has not worked with the 'Hafenanwälte' for a long time."
And the text reads:
"At the beginning of the pandemic, we still believed in the rule of law and that lawyers could help us. We entered into a consulting agreement with the "Hafenanwälte" Antonia Fischer, Justus Hoffmann, and Marcel Templin on an hourly basis and discussed legal issues that parents had brought to our attention.
The extent to which the advice was useful is also a matter of debate within our organization. What is clear, however, is that even a theoretically correct legal assessment is useless if the courts do not abide by the law.
In addition, we were no longer able to bear the costs in 2022 and discontinued the consultations. In the summer of 2022, we then formally terminated the consulting agreement (and afterwards the "Hafenanwälte" collapsed, as described above, note by the signatory).
In addition to consulting on an hourly basis, we had commissioned the "port lawyers" in 2021 to file a constitutional complaint. Since costs of 25,000 euros were to be expected in the event of a lawsuit, we had to pay this money to the "port lawyers" in advance. We suspect that the "Hafenanwälte" did file this action. The work involved is likely to amount to around 2,500 euros. However, the court refused to accept the case. Therefore, no further work was required on the part of the "Hafenanwälte." However, we were not reimbursed a single cent.
No one at the law firm can be reached by telephone (as always, since, as mentioned above, there was no secretary willing to work for these strange "port lawyers," note by the undersigned). None of the three lawyers responded to emails, not even to a reminder sent by registered mail. They only responded to the court order, but only in the form of a formal rejection of our claims (...)
Our impression is that the legal system primarily serves the government and the industrial-military-pharmaceutical-digital financial complex, as well as their legal representatives as a source of income (...)
We are not familiar with the situation of the "port lawyers"; perhaps they have their backs against the wall and are fighting for survival with all means at their disposal. But we are very disappointed because we thought these Corona-critical lawyers were on our side (as is now clear, they are on the other side, note by the signatory). We have no insight into the background of the conflict in the Corona Committee. Our cooperation with the "port lawyers" in 2020 and 2021 had nothing to do with the Corona Committee."
12. The further content of the criminal complaint filed by the "port lawyers," which is riddled with false accusations from start to finish
The criminal complaint then goes on to claim that the informants of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution seriously assert that Viviane Fischer told them that after their (Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, note by the undersigned) absence from the Corona Committee, "donations had declined sharply."
But even Viviane Fischer found this too brazen and commented:
"The departure of Justus and Antonia in the summer of 2021 has not had any noticeable effect on donations."
Viviane Fischer then comments on the complainants' assertion that she told them Dr. Fuellmich had been keeping the law firm running with €30,000 in donations per month. In fact, when they filed the criminal complaint, the complainants knew full well that the amount was only €25,000, including travel and accommodation costs for Dr. Fuellmich's trips to Berlin for the broadcasts, In fact, Dr. Fuellmich's law firm had detailed in an email dated August 30, 2022, to the lawyer organizing Dr. Fuellmich's law firm, Cathrin Behn, that almost all of the legal work of Dr. Fuellmich's law firm had been displaced by the communication work for the Corona Committee, which was not done by anyone else. This is also confirmed by the statement made by the accountant of Dr. Fuellmich's law firm, Ms. Loges, on October 27, 2022, before the Göttingen public prosecutor's office. In total, approximately 322,800 emails, hundreds of letters, and hundreds of phone calls were processed for the Corona Committee over a period of two years. The complainants knew all this because they themselves submitted the relevant email containing this information from lawyer Cathrin Behn to Viviane Fischer dated August 30, 2022, as Annex 5 with their criminal complaint to the public prosecutor's office on September 2, 2022. They also knew that all of this had been properly invoiced, as evidenced by the invoices they themselves attached as Annex 6 to the criminal complaint. Viviane Fischer's comment on this can be found on page 173 at the bottom of the main file, volume 4, and reads:
"No, I didn't know that, I didn't know that in that level of detail. I only knew that he said it was for processing his emails, that it was for processing his email account, because there was supposedly chaos in Berlin."
In fact, she knew exactly what work Dr. Fuellmich's law firm was being paid for. This is evident from the fact
– she received the bank statements brought by Dr. Fuellmich every Friday, which were provided to him specifically for Viviane Fischer, as long as attorney Tobias Weissenborn was acting as trustee for the Corona Committee account, and
– she signed the preliminary annual financial statement for 2020, in which these costs are reported (mind you, as a lawyer and economist!), and
– that these costs were also paid from November or December 2021 onwards via her own account, which she held in her own name on behalf of the Corona Committee, so that she herself could see from her own bank statements how this work was paid for, and above all:
– how her completely unemotional (not surprised or even outraged) chat message of July 6, 2022 (page 11 of self-reading folder 3) to Dr. Fuellmich shows that she actually knew everything exactly:
"Expenses for legal work in your area are no longer possible (emphasis added by the signatory), the emails can simply no longer be processed or we will have to find a solution via Maike, who currently receives 900 euros per month from us (...) We now need more money for important projects."
It is important to emphasize that she did indeed know that the law firm's costs had been paid up to that point ("no longer possible" means that it had been possible up to that point). Worse still, however, is this: any clear-thinking person would ask themselves, in relation to an institution that lives exclusively from donations and viewers, what could possibly be more important than professional communication with the very donors and viewers who make the work possible in the first place.
On page 173 of the main file, page 4, something appears for the first time that could, at least in theory, serve as the basis for a criminal complaint for fraud or embezzlement if the complainants write:
"He (Dr. Fuellmich, note by the signatory) had (indirect speech: has" ???) a loan of €700,000 paid out, which he has not repaid to date."
First of all, it should be noted that the complainants knew full well that Dr. Fuellmich was in the process of repaying the loan when they filed their criminal complaint on September 2, 2022. This is precisely what is stated in Dr. Fuellmich's email dated August 26, 2022, which they attached to their criminal complaint as Exhibit 3. Furthermore, the complainants themselves were feverishly trying to find out who would pay the purchase price mentioned in the email for Dr. Fuellmich's property in Göttingen in order to threaten and blackmail him, as they did, so that they would receive this purchase price, as they did, and Dr. Fuellmich would not be able to repay the loan. In short: With the help of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security and under the supervision of the accused John, you stole Dr. Fuellmich's money so that your allegations in the criminal complaint that Dr. Fuellmich did not want to repay the loan would at least appear credible to idiots.
It is surprising that Viviane Fischer did not also disclose her own loan. And it is even more surprising that, despite this clear indication, the accused John, in his arrest warrant of March 15, 2023, assumes that there are no loans totaling 700,000 euros (as the complainants correctly state), but that he believes €200,000 was "simply stolen" from Dr. Fuellmich's committee and only €500,000 was granted as a loan.
At this point, Viviane Fischer uses the term "liquidity reserve" for the first time in her comment on this, writing:
"That was the liquidity reserve."
This proves two things: She had not yet used this term when she met with the "port lawyers" in August 2022. Otherwise, they would have used this term in their criminal complaint as well. However, they consistently refer to loans of over 700,000 euros in the criminal complaint. It was only in her comments on the criminal complaint on October 16, 2020 (see the text by attorney Willanzheimer, who sent this comment to the public prosecutor's office in a letter dated December 5, 2023), i.e., after the criminal complaint dated September 2, 2022, which had been drafted without this term, had been filed by the " ," that this term was used by Viviane Fischer for the first time.
As the examination of another former lawyer of Viviane Fischer, Ivan Künnemann, revealed in court, this was the result of legal advice given to Viviane Fischer by the witness, lawyer Künnemann, in August or September 2022. She had approached him because, after the meeting with the "port lawyers" in August 2022, she herself was afraid of becoming the victim of a criminal complaint by these lawyers, whom she considered to be "ticking time bombs." Künnemann testified in court that, based on his conversation with Viviane Fischer, he had understood that this was something like a trust agreement, not really a loan, after Viviane Fischer had used the term "liquidity reserve" for the first time following its initial use in the mediation attempt in August 2022.
Prior to this, the term "liquidity reserve" does not appear anywhere in the entire chat or email correspondence evaluated, not even in the chat message dated July 6, 2022, quoted above, although it would have been more than obvious to refer to it in the supposedly absolutely secure private space of the "Threema" messenger, at least in an alleged emergency situation, i.e., in the event of a liquidity crisis that allegedly posed an acute threat to the functioning of the Corona Committee (which, however, as has since been established, never existed). The term does not appear anywhere before its very first use by Viviane Fischer in the August 2022 Mediations-Zoom. And when the defendant Schindler asked Viviane Fischer whether she had ever used this term in relation to Dr. Fuellmich, she expressly stated:
"No,"
as was also noted by the trial observers.
At least Viviane Fischer subsequently stated in her comments on the criminal complaint that, contrary to the allegations made by the complainants in the criminal complaint, the gold had been collected by her and Robert Cibis in Göttingen in consultation with Dr. Fuellmich (Dr. Fuellmich was still on the Crimes Against Humanity Tour in the US at the time):
"No, the collection in Göttingen was coordinated with Reiner, and we had a nice evening with Inka and the lady who had kept the gold. It had been agreed with Reiner that Jens would take the gold and keep it safe."
That is exactly what happened, because Jens Kuhn had access to a professional safe deposit box.
Viviane Fischer also rejects the subsequent—as always, completely fabricated—accusation made by the complainants that Dr. Fuellmich had "openly admitted" that he was billing the company for legal services that had not actually been provided and that he had also asked the witness Viviane Fischer in the past to follow his example at if she needed money. She writes:
"No, he didn't say I should do the same. We could have guessed that he would do that."
This is perfectly logical. If such illegal activities had taken place – which they did not! – then only particularly stupid people (such as those who write hate mail and calls for murder under the pseudonym "Dominatrix") would have disclosed them.
On page 176, at the top, the complainants then construct a flight risk concerning Dr. Fuellmich and write:
"The witness Viviane Fischer expressed concern that the accused Dr. Fuellmich had massive financial problems and was heavily in debt."
Viviane Fischer immediately clarifies that this is also false:
"No, I did not say that because I knew nothing about his financial problems."
Because there was no financial problem for Dr. Fuellmich – it was the complainants who created a financial problem by stealing his money so that their criminal complaint accusing Dr. Fuellmich of not repaying his loan would at least be taken seriously by people of their own caliber.
Precisely because Dr. Fuellmich had no financial problems, Senior Public Prosecutor Dr. Kutzner from the Braunschweig Public Prosecutor's Office had to resort to astonishing lies in order to somehow construct these alleged financial problems as a (desperately needed!) motive. For example, she claimed that an email from Viviane Fischer to Jens Kuhn, in which Viviane Fischer writes she no longer even had enough money to pay her health insurance contributions and therefore needed more than €59,000 (!) immediately, came from Dr. Fuellmich, and was therefore a call for financial help from Dr. Fuellmich and not, as was actually the case, a call for financial help from Viviane Fischer.
One can only act so brazenly if one has cover "from the very top," as Justus Hoffmann repeatedly explained to witness Seifert regarding his actions against Dr. Fuellmich. But the defendant Schindler does not want to hear this witness any more than he wants to hear Marcel Templin, because otherwise it would become apparent that the proceedings against Dr. Fuellmich are a fake indictment that the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security had brought against Dr. Fuellmich in order to remove him from circulation because of his work in exposing the coronavirus.
The criminal complaint then repeats the usual threat scenario as a killer argument, with the complainants writing again:
"The witnesses Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann requested that they not yet 'appear openly' due to the past threats made by the accused Dr. Fuellmich, meaning that they should not yet reveal that they are now privy to the information."
Viviane Fischer counters this, which is clearly intended as a substitute for a genuine explanation for the complete inaction of the complainants until September 2, 2022, once again very accurately, especially for non-lawyers, with:
"This was not given as a reason; it was said for tactical reasons." (Emphasis added by the undersigned)
On page 176 R of the main file, volume 4, the complainants then debate with Viviane Fischer – at least that is how they present it – that, in their view, Dr. Fuellmich's law firm had, in an outrageous and unnecessary manner, taken over the communication work with the donors and viewers of Corona and had (of course) just like any other service provider of the Corona Committee.
The only remarkable thing about this is that on page 176 R above, they claim that attorneys Tobias Weissenborn and Cathrin Behn and Dr. Fuellmich "freely admit" to misappropriating the company's funds and merely explain why it is morally justified that they received payments for this work, which effectively displaced all other work in the law firm (see above).
At this point, it becomes clear once again: Annex 5 to the criminal complaint (email from attorney Cathrin Behn regarding the enormous scope of the communication work) proves this and was also confirmed by the accountant of Dr. Fuellmich's law firm, Vera Loges, to police investigator Spörhase on October 27, 2023 (pages 72 to 76, main file volume 4): The communications work for the Corona Committee, which was not done anywhere else – certainly not in Berlin – had taken up almost all of the legal work of Dr. Fuellmich's law firm and its employees (since no one in the Corona Committee in Berlin responded, people turned to Dr. Fuellmich's law firm). It goes without saying that proper and professional work must be paid properly – at least for normal people living in the real world.
Only that, namely that Dr. Fuellmich's law firm had taken over almost all of the Corona Committee's communication work because the Corona Committee itself had not provided anyone for this task (except for a friend of Viviane Fischer, who occasionally summarized a few emails and sent them to Dr. Fuellmich's law firm for a response), only that had been explained by lawyers Tobias Weissenborn and Cathrin Behn, but by no means admitted. Of course, they had certainly not admitted that they were guilty of any form of breach of trust.
13. On the misappropriation of client funds for the class action by the "port lawyers"
On pages 177 and 177 R, the complainants then attempt to explain why, although they had been dismissed by the "class action" clients (almost all of whom had formally switched to Dr. Fuellmich, who was already handling all the class action work, when they realized that the "Hafen lawyers" were not even able to communicate with them, but that this was also being handled by Dr. Fuellmich and Jens Kuhn) certainly not against Dr. Fuellmich of all people, nevertheless did so and, by means of fraud and extortion, as has now been established, had Marcel Templin register a land charge in Göttingen on Dr. Fuellmich's property in November 2021.
In doing so, they declare in all seriousness that they, who do not have even the slightest knowledge of English, have no knowledge of Anglo-American law and certainly no license to practice law in another country, namely in an Anglo-American country, now wanted to claim damages for their client, who had long since switched to Dr. Fuellmich as the actual handler of the class action lawsuit. The statement by the movement "Eltern stehen auf e. V." quoted above shows how the completely absurd actions of these incompetent individuals, which can only be explained by the support of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security, affect other clients.
At least Viviane Fischer understood this as it was meant, namely that the complainants, and in particular the complainant Templin, in whose account the money stolen from Dr. Fuellmich and his "class action" clients is held, seriously intend to pursue such "class action" claims for damages. After all, that was precisely what the clients' money had been paid for.
That is why Viviane Fischer writes in horror on page 177 R at the top of volume 4 of the main file:
"I find that absurd. Templin cannot possibly afford to file a US lawsuit himself or commission someone else to do so, and an unknown Marcel Templin would not have been able to acquire these funds. Templin himself has not yet taken any action on behalf of the clients. He should have taken other steps (...) after he had known or must have known for a long time that Reiner was not doing anything."
14. At the time of sale, the land register for the property in Göttingen was completely clean and unencumbered.
Viviane Fischer then also noticed that Templin (personally) had a land charge registered after the sale of the Göttingen property by Dr. Fuellmich, even though the land register was completely clean. She could not have known that this was achieved with the help of a corrupt notary, but she reveals in her comment that she had also been lied to about the registration of the land charge by Justus Hoffmann:
"There are different statements regarding the use of the loan proceeds. Justus Hoffmann wrote to me that they were used to repay the junior creditors Wucherpfennig and Markgraf."
This is also false and a lie told by Justus Hoffmann. The land register was completely "clean." There were land charges, but these were owner's land charges, i.e., "empty" land charges, because the loan claims secured by the land charges had long since been repaid by Dr. Fuellmich. Dr. Fuellmich had left these land charges, which had become owner's land charges, on the property in order to use them as collateral for new loans if necessary. This saves on notary and other costs. This is because when a new loan is taken out, a new land charge (which is costly) does not have to be registered first. Instead, the existing land charge is simply transferred to the new lender by the owner of the property and the land charge (hence: owner's land charge) without incurring any costs.
The land charges for Wucherpfennig and Markgraf were precisely such owner's land charges, which Dr. Fuellmich had left on the property because he assumed that the new owners of the property (the buyers) would also be able to use them as collateral for their own financing of the purchase. For reasons that are not clear, the purchaser Röstel, who was later blackmailed and defrauded by the complainants, did not want to take advantage of this opportunity to save money, but instead had a new land charge (at great expense) drawn up by a notary and registered, and therefore had the existing owner's land charge deleted by Dr. Fuellmich. This is exactly what Dr. Fuellmich did when he was informed of this, so that this owner's land charge was deleted on the basis of the so-called deletion authorization granted by Markgraf and Wucherpfennig.
Contrary to the once again brazenly false assertion of Justus Hoffmann, who is apparently incapable of making any true statement, no redemption by means of any money, let alone client funds, was required.
15. Contrary to the allegations made by the complainants, work on a class action was always pursued by Dr. Fuellmich with the help of international colleagues, and lawsuits were filed.
The complainants then went on to claim that
"In reality, the accused Dr. Fuellmich has not intended to file the class action lawsuit for some time,"
is not only another brazen untruth. It also proves the complainants' complete ignorance of American law and, in particular, of class action lawsuits. In fact, Dr. Fuellmich had filed all the lawsuits he had prepared together with his international colleagues based on the PCR test deception, or they had been filed by colleagues admitted to the respective courts.
This happened first in New York, where our colleague Ray Flores filed the corresponding PCR test lawsuit; then in Ontario, Canada, where our colleague Michael Swinwood (in collaboration with a former student of Dr. Fuellmich, who wrote the PCR test section) filed a class action lawsuit. This was followed by a corresponding PCR test lawsuit in South Africa, where colleague Dexter Ryneveldt – again based on the PCR test – filed a lawsuit with the highest court, the Constitutional Court, with the help of Dr. Fuellmich and several scientists and international lawyers. This was followed by another class action lawsuit in British Columbia, Canada, where Dr. Fuellmich is named as special counsel for the class action by Mr. Kip Warner's company, which filed the PCR test lawsuit there.
All of these lawsuits have been filed. The claim that Dr. Fuellmich did not intend to file these lawsuits is therefore false. However, with the exception of those in British Columbia, whose fate is currently unknown, they were only admitted as individual lawsuits, not as class actions.
Subsequently, the international lawyers worked with Dr. Fuellmich (initially only his South African colleague Dexter Ryneveldt was involved, later joined by US colleagues Ana Garner and French colleague Virginie de Araujo-Recchia and German colleague Dagmar Schön, with Dr. Fuellmich) in New Zealand, whose indigenous Maori people have a completely independent judicial system separate from English common law. This was followed by similar efforts in Africa until Dr. Fuellmich was kidnapped from Mexico, with the result that all 54 states agreed to conduct a legal investigation into the Corona plandemic in all its details, based on discussions between Dr. Fuellmich, his colleague Dexter Ryneveldt, and the president of the African Bar Association.
From pages 177 to 179 of the main file, volume 4, there follow, one after the other and without any reference to the case – exactly as one would expect from inexperienced lawyers – legal arguments copied from commentaries and textbooks, However, as one would also expect from inexperienced lawyers, these are repeatedly mixed with individual factual claims that actually belong in the statement of facts, which are then commented on again by Viviane Fischer. On page 177, for example, the complainants claim:
"The purchase of the gold itself may not constitute embezzlement (...) however, it is obvious that Fuellmich did not want to own the gold for the company and had purchased it for himself as a 'security measure' due to his own considerable financial losses."
This assertion is also made out of thin air and without any solid factual basis, and is then commented on accordingly by Viviane Fischer:
"No one knows that (...)"
Not only is this not known, but it has also been proven false – as have all the other allegations made by the complainants: Dr. Fuellmich had acquired the gold for the Corona Committee as its representative, , and this is also stated in the Corona Committee's documents as gold belonging to the Corona Committee by accountant Jens Kuhn. And Dr. Fuellmich certainly did not have any financial problems. These had to be invented by Senior Public Prosecutor Kutzner of the General Public Prosecutor's Office of the Higher Regional Court of Braunschweig, who (Senior Public Prosecutor Dr. Kutzner) brazenly passed off financial requests for help from Viviane Fischer as those of Dr. Fuellmich (see above).
The crude work of the complainants ends on page 178 R with the false assertion:
"Dr. Fuellmich appears to be heavily in debt,"
which Viviane Fischer comments on with:
"How do they know that?"
This is followed by the perennial claim of alleged threats, which the complainants use to explain their complete inaction over more than a year (which will be a decisive factor in the pending civil proceedings):
"In addition, the witnesses Antonia Fischer, Justus Hoffmann, and Marcel Templin fear that if Dr. Fuellmich becomes aware of this criminal complaint, he will expend considerable energy to harm the witnesses, as already described. This is also supported by the fact that Fuellmich has been saying for a long time that he would take the Winchester out of the closet if necessary (...)",
which Viviane Fischer comments on as follows:
"That's absurd, everyone knows he's just saying that for effect (...)"
And then:
"That is a suggestive insinuation."
At the very end, the complainants, as instructed, not only create a fictitious threat, but even threaten to withdraw the criminal complaint if Dr. Fuellmich is granted a legal hearing, as is mandatory under the Code of Criminal Procedure, by seriously feigning fear:
"In any case, we request that you consult with the witnesses should Fuellmich (...) be given the opportunity to comment before criminal proceedings (i.e., the arrest of Dr. Fuellmich, note by the signatory) are initiated. In this case, the witnesses would want to refrain from filing a criminal complaint for fear of threats, violence, and defamation."
Viviane Fischer writes:
"What's that supposed to mean? That doesn't convince me (...)"
The sole reason for the complainants' threat to the public prosecutor's office is that Dr. Fuellmich should not, under any circumstances, be granted the right to a fair hearing, to which he is entitled under constitutional law, before his abduction/arrest. If he had been granted this right, the entire web of lies in the criminal complaint and the arrest warrant would have collapsed.
It must be emphasized once again that this criminal complaint, consisting exclusively of crude false allegations, was the sole basis for the public prosecutor's action against Dr. Fuellmich and his wife under the accused John. The accused John had stated this on March 15, 2023 (page 156, page 2 of the main file) when applying for the arrest warrant, which was then immediately waved through by the magistrate Moog without being checked and without a legible signature – both with regard to the proceedings against Dr. Fuellmich and the proceedings against Dr. Fuellmich's wife – he wrote:
"The suspicion of a crime (note: both against Dr. Fuellmich and his completely uninvolved wife) arises from the criminal complaint filed by the co-shareholders and a comprehensive analysis of the account summaries."
Since the content of the bank statements was never disputed and everything is transparently documented there and in the Corona Committee's files – in particular everything that flowed through the accounts – and since a complete account analysis had already been carried out when the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security first attempted to remove Dr. Fuellmich from circulation, the criminal complaint remains the sole basis for the accused John's action against Dr. Fuellmich and his wife.
On this basis alone, an arrest warrant was issued on March 15, 2023, and on April 11, 2023, the account of Dr. Fuellmich's wife was seized, in particular her pension entitlements due to occupational disability as a teacher up to the amount of 200,000 euros (page 178, volume 4 of the main file; Volume 2 of the main file).
16. The collapse of the allegations contained in the criminal complaint, the arrest warrant, and the indictment, and the path from the abduction in Mexico to the criminal complaint to the fabricated new allegations on May 3, 2024
Not a single one of the criminal allegations made by the complainants – none of which had even the slightest basis in fact – proved to be tenable in court, so that the first attempt by the defendants John and Schindler to remove Dr. Fuellmich from circulation on the instructions of the German domestic intelligence service failed, and it became necessary to replace the actual allegations with the so-called legal notice on May 3, 2024.
This disastrous (interim) result for the criminal complaint, which has proven to be nothing but a pack of lies, is not only confirmed by Viviane Fischer's largely accurate commentary, but also by the above-cited statement by André Bruns, an employee of the Braunschweig Main Customs Office, André Bruns, who correctly states with regard to the criminal allegations made by the complainants (page 100, main file volume 3):
"No evidence for the assumption/allegation made can be found in the criminal complaint itself or in the subsequent correspondence."
Once again, the question arises as to why this simple statement, which applies to all of the complainants' allegations, could only be made by the witnesses Bruns and Viviane Fischer, but not by the defendants Schindler and Johns. Once again, the question arises as to why the defendants John and Recha did not conduct or even attempt any investigations, in particular of the defendant Dr. Fuellmich and his lawyers Tobias Weissenborn, Cathrin Behn, and finally Dagmar Schön (representing Dr. Fuellmich's wife), in gross violation of his/her right to a fair hearing, not only was this hearing not granted, but it was also deliberately denied. Why were the complainants and Viviane Fischer not at least questioned as witnesses, as the apparently honest police investigator Spörhase notes on page 135 of the main file, volume 1? If Viviane Fischer had been heard as a witness, it would have been clarified at that time that all criminally relevant allegations made by the complainants/undercover agents of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution were false and/or had been made without any basis in fact. Why was not at least the fact that the complainants themselves had attached Dr. Fuellmich's email of August 26, 2022, to the criminal complaint, in which he verifiably points out that he had taken out a loan for the temporary protection of part of the donations (precisely from the institutions for which the accused John and Schindler work and from which they received their instructions to construct a criminal case against Dr. Fuellmich) in the amount of 700,000 euros was in the process of being repaid through the already ongoing sale of the property for at least 1.3 million euros (page 38/39, Main File Volume 1) to investigate whether Dr. Fuellmich or the complainants were telling the truth?
So why did the defendants not check any of the allegations that, according to the statements of witnesses Bruns and Viviane Fischer, were unsubstantiated nonsense? Why were they not even able to ascertain that, contrary to the allegations made by the complainants, Dr. Fuellmich was indeed solely authorized to manage the company?
Why does the accused John claim in his arrest warrant and later also in the indictment, despite the contrary provision in the articles of association, that Dr. Fuellmich should not have taken out the loan? Why does he claim in this arrest warrant, contrary to the content of the email dated August 26, 2022, submitted by the complainants themselves, and contrary to the content of the criminal complaint itself, and in the knowledge that the complainants had informed Dr. xml-ph-0000@deepl.internal Fuellmich of the loan agreement, that Dr. Fuellmich was not authorized to take out the loan?2022 and contrary to the content of the criminal complaint itself, and in the knowledge that the complainants had stolen the money intended for the repayment of the loan from Dr. Fuellmich by means of extortion and fraud, that Dr. Fuellmich had no intention of repaying this money? Why does he accuse Dr. Fuellmich in this arrest warrant of having taken out a loan of over 500,000 euros but never having intended to repay it from the outset, and that he had stolen another 200,000 euros from the Corona Committee without any legal basis, with the intention of never repaying this money either, even though both the criminal complaint and the email attached to it (Exhibit 3) clearly refer to loans totaling 700,000 euros? How could the accused fail to notice that the author of the criminal complaint, Justus Hoffmann, is a severely mentally disturbed person, as the latest events (keyword: "Dominatrix") have shown the court beyond any doubt on March 23, 2025, at the latest?
Why did both the accused prosecutors and the accused Schindler remain completely inactive despite the concrete dangers deliberately created by Justus Hoffmann and Antonia Fischer, which were presented to them in detail and in a verifiable manner, and knowingly and willingly leave it to lucky chance that the judicial officials would protect Ms. Wörmer? These judicial officials were all shocked by the behavior of the public prosecutor's office and the accused Schindler. Only they intervened when one of the two would-be assassins sent by Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann approached attorney Wörmer in a threatening manner as she was trying to recover from the behavior of the complainants, the accused prosecutors, and the accused Schindler in the courtyard of the district court. And why did the defendants Schindler and Recha do absolutely nothing to protect the defense, especially their colleague Wörmer, and again leave it to lucky chance that the court officials called an ambulance for her after she collapsed, which took her to the hospital? Why did and does the defendant John, despite everything, maintain close contact with the complainants without even making a token attempt to document this in the public prosecutor's files? Why did the accused John share information from Dr. Fuellmich's prosecution file with the accused Justus Hoffmann for his civil law rampage against attorney Dagmar Schön, which was ultimately stopped by the Berlin Court of Appeal, as Justus Hoffmann triumphantly writes to the presiding judge of the Court of Appeal in a brief submitted to the court and the accused Schindler?
Res ipsa loquitur: The facts speak for themselves. These outrageous facts also include the measures of so-called "white torture" used by the defendant Schindler together with the defendants Dr. Jakob and Luther from the Rosdorf prison for more than six months, which will be discussed in more detail below. And these facts also include the fact that the defendants completely ignored the severe traumatization of Dr. Fuellmich, which was diagnosed by a medical expert and caused by the "white torture," and also refused to have an official assessment (ultimately of their own crimes) carried out as requested due to the traumatization.
The abduction of Dr. Fuellmich from Mexico on October 11, 2023, by the defendants Roggatz and John and the attempt by the defendant Schindler, who was arrested on the orders of the Federal Criminal Police Office ( ), to conceal the abduction as a "deportation" clearly demonstrate that the present case is not about prosecuting Dr. Fuellmich for a criminal offense, but solely about removing him from circulation at any cost and by any means necessary because of his work to expose the coronavirus. This is because this abduction was also carried out in close cooperation with the complainants, in particular Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, as evidenced by the – most likely incomplete – email correspondence in the public prosecutor's investigation file:
a) The kidnapping of Dr. Fuellmich from Mexico, orchestrated by the defendants Roggatz and John in close cooperation with the accused "port lawyers," and the concealment of this kidnapping as a sham deportation
The complainants acted as if they were acting on behalf of the Corona Committee when, in March 2023, they approached Dr. Fuellmich through Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab and, allegedly on behalf of the witness Viviane Fischer, to seek a settlement regarding, on the one hand, the money they had stolen from Dr. Fuellmich and, on the other hand, the gold purchased for the Corona Committee. in reality on behalf of the public prosecutor's office. Accordingly, during their examination in court (the witnesses Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann), they clearly admitted that they were not interested in settlement negotiations at all, that these were only conducted for appearances' sake because they were in fact working for the public prosecutor's office and wanted to have Dr. Fuellmich imprisoned at all costs. What was surprising at the time – but not anymore, since Justus Hoffmann's "dominatrix" appearances have since become known – was the hatred expressed toward Dr. Fuellmich, especially by the defendant Justus Hoffmann. This is the opposite of what one would expect under the circumstances: the cautious behavior of a fraudster, blackmailer, and thief who is aware of his guilt. After all, the complainants had stolen more than 1.58 million euros plus around 400,000 euros in client funds (protected and accompanied by the Göttingen judiciary and the defendant John) from Dr. Fuellmich. And after all, as can be seen from the chat communication between Justus Hoffmann and Viviane Fischer, which was read out in detail in court,
"(...) the resistance, what he thinks of me, is so ..." (page 244, main file volume 4)
not only all scientists, doctors, lawyers, judges, and prosecutors who criticized the government's coronavirus measures, but also their own clients, as clearly demonstrated by the reactions of people from the "Eltern stehen auf" (Parents Stand Up) movement, which have already been cited above as examples. This true activity as covert assistants to the public prosecutor's office (and the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security) is also proven by the fact that Antonia Fischer forwarded the entire "settlement negotiation correspondence" ostensibly conducted with Dr. Fuellmich to the public prosecutor's office, namely to the defendant John. For example, an email dated July 24, 2023, which Dr. Fuellmich wrote to Antonia Fischer, can be found in the file because it was forwarded by Antonia Fischer to the defendant John on July 25, 2023 (page 101, main file volume 3). And even before that, according to page 5, main file volume 3, the defendant John had prepared for Dr. Fuellmich's arrest in England because the defendant Justus Hoffmann had informed him by email on May 22, 2023, about everything he had spied on for the defendant John:
"Dear Mr. John,
There are increasing signs that our colleague Dr. Fuellmich will be in the United Kingdom from June 1 to 4 and will be speaking at the "Better Way Conference."
According to the "BWC 2023" tab, he is scheduled to be a guest speaker on June 2 (see attached screenshot). Announcements on Twitter also indicate that he will indeed be present in person.
The BWC 2023 begins on June 1, 2023, with a "meet and greet" dinner, which serves to raise funds. It can be assumed that he will also already be in Bath on this date and will therefore arrive around May 30 or 31.
If relevant: any flight connections from airports near where I suspect he will be staying, provided that flight times do not exceed 30 hours, via
DFW (Dallas-Fort Worth) and DUB (Dublin),
SFO (San Francisco) and DUB,
LAX (Los Angeles) and DUB,
MEX (Mexico City) and AMS (Amsterdam), or SLC and AMS...
Kind regards,
Justus Hoffmann"
In fact, this, combined with his behavior during his interrogation as a witness and his hate mail and defamatory emails sent under the pseudonym "Dominatrix," combined with his calls for murder accompanied by corresponding images, confirms Justus Hoffmann's severe mental disorder.
And since he no longer has a job (except, apparently, for one that may only exist as a cover to cover his most urgent living expenses) at the chair of his patron, Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab, and has no friends, he is paranoid and manic about Dr. Fuellmich almost around the clock.
The extent to which the complainants, as informants for the Office for the Protection of the Constitution and undercover assistants to the public prosecutor's office, especially the accused John, in the kidnapping of Dr. Fuellmich is also reflected in an email from the accused John dated September 30, 2023, to the liaison officer for the Office for the Protection of the Constitution, the accused Lars Roggatz from the Lower Saxony State Criminal Police Office, and the BKA man Götz Knobloch, who was carrying out the instructions of the BKA in Mexico, . In it, the accused John writes (page 153, main file 3):
"Dear Mr. Roggatz, dear Mr. Knobloch,
Thank you very much for the information and offers of assistance you sent me. I have discussed a number of things with the AE (= complainants, note by the undersigned).
In particular, whether it would be possible to persuade the accused to issue a new power of attorney to the consulate. This seems to have worked. On Monday, I will discuss this in more detail with Ms. Fischer (meaning Antonia Fischer, note by the undersigned). What do you think? Is it worth a try (before initiating the extradition request)? What do you think about the AE's concerns that the accused might go to another consulate?"
This email proves two things:
Firstly, the accused, John, is also aware that the German arrest warrant he requested with the help of grossly false accusations, as well as its inflated version as a European arrest warrant, are of course useless outside Europe. Mexico does not belong to South America, as the amateurs at the State Criminal Police Office believe, for example on page 126, main file volume 3:
"The person Fuellmich is believed to be in South America, presumably Mexico."
Mexico belongs to North America, but certainly not to Europe.
For this reason, because neither the German nor the European arrest warrant is of any use in Mexico, the accused John inquires about the correct procedure for arrest, namely whether extradition could be sought.
However, extradition proceedings would have immediately led to a hearing for Dr. Fuellmich in Mexico, during which he would have immediately refuted the clearly false allegations in the arrest warrant (200,000 euros "simply stolen," loan contrary to company law, no intention to repay) by simply presenting the loan agreements, the complete articles of association with the sole power of management contained therein, and the email dated August 26, 2022, plus the purchase agreement for the German real estate he sold, plus the emails proving that the complainants had stolen the money intended for the loan claim. In order to avoid this, the only correct course of action, namely the extradition proceedings, had to be prevented.
Secondly, the reference to the complainants proves that they played a decisive role in the planned kidnapping instead of extradition.
In addition to feigning (non-existent) passport problems in order to lure Dr. Fuellmich to the consulate in Tijuana, the complainants also wanted to make Dr. Fuellmich believe that the trip to Tijuana to the German consulate would be worthwhile for him because he would be able to have a new power of attorney certified there for the gold stored in Berlin.
This concerns the comparative solution feigned by the complainants on behalf of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security, on the one hand, regarding the money stolen from Dr. Fuellmich by the complainants and, on the other hand, regarding the gold stored in Berlin, over which only Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich or someone with a power of attorney from Dr. Fuellmich can dispose.
Originally, Dr. Fuellmich had issued a power of attorney for Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab and had it certified. As the negotiator appointed by the complainants, Prof. Schwab had initially been pleased to be able to use this power of attorney to settle the dispute (which he also considered to be highly dangerous for his clients from a criminal law perspective). He too was aware that his clients had committed serious criminal offenses and were therefore facing very high civil damages claims.
As a reminder, Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab wrote in an email to Dr. Fuellmich and the "Hafenanwälte" dated March 22, 2023, which is available to the court, when he had just begun to conduct sham settlement negotiations with Dr. Fuellmich on behalf of the accused "Hafenanwälte":
"As I do not wish to expose myself to accusations of having participated in the misappropriation of your money or even of having enriched myself with your money, I have now paid the outstanding invoice out of my own pocket. Marcel and Justus are aware of this. I spoke to Marcel this morning and canceled the solutions I had discussed with him regarding a loan from Marcel to Nils.
Best regards, Martin."
Previously, Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab had asked Dr. Fuellmich whether he would agree to the accused Marcel Templin paying a sum of around 13,000 euros from the more than 1.58 million euros stolen from Dr. Fuellmich by the accused "port lawyers" to a friend of Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab to pay legal costs. Dr. Fuellmich had pointed out to Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab that this money had been stolen from him by the accused "Hafen lawyers" by means of fraud and extortion and in collaboration with a corrupt notary, who had persuaded the real estate buyer Röstel to transfer the amount stolen from Dr. Fuellmich to transfer the stolen amount of more than 1.58 million euros to the defendant Marcel Templin instead of to an account belonging to Dr. Fuellmich's wife, as stipulated in the purchase agreement .
He had also pointed out to Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab that Marcel Templin had no claims against Dr. Fuellmich whatsoever, neither his own nor any claims derived from the class action clients.
This means that after this conversation, Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab knew what the court later had to recognize, namely that the accused "port lawyers" had stolen this money from Dr. Fuellmich. That is why he correctly states in the email quoted above that the money in the account of the accused Marcel Templin is "your money," i.e., money that belongs to Dr. Fuellmich. And because he also knew that Marcel Templin's client money had been stolen or embezzled, he did not want to make himself guilty of "breach of trust" (towards Dr. Fuellmich's clients) as well.
The defendant John's question about the risk mentioned by the complainants that Dr. Fuellmich would go to a consulate other than the one in Tijuana that had been prepared for the kidnapping refers to the email from the defendant Antonia Fischer to the defendant John dated September 29, 2023, which is quoted below:
"Hello Mr. John,
This is the reply to the email I wrote to him (meaning: Dr. Fuellmich, note by the signatory) two hours ago, which I am inserting below as a quote (Antonia Fischer then quotes her own email to Dr. Fuellmich as follows, note by the signatory):
I would like to return to the actual topic, although it is now clear that Dagmar is no longer acting as proxy." (This refers to the lawyer Dagmar Schön, whom the complainants, despite their hatred for her because she had seen through them, decided to appoint as their representative after consulting with the defendant John in order to lure Dr. Fuellmich to Tijuana, note by the signatory.)
Dagmar Schön was thus effectively the replacement for Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab, who had just dropped out. Antonia Fischer's email continues:
"What are the total costs for you if you have another power of attorney drawn up?
Best regards, Antonia"
Antonia Fischer then continues with a direct question to the defendant John:
"Before I continue, I would like to consult with my colleagues so as not to run the risk of making any promises to that could be detrimental to us under civil law because (...) There is now also a risk that he may seek out another honorary consul."
This email to the accused, this time from the accused Antonia Fischer, also shows that she too (as Justus Hoffmann later did in his civil lawsuit against attorney Dagmar Schön, see above) wanted to secure his help in order to avoid, quite rightly, liability issues leading to damages for joint abduction/unlawful detention, or at least aiding and abetting the abduction/unlawful detention of Dr. Fuellmich.
For the conduct of all the accused—which they can no longer deny—is not only relevant under criminal law because it leads to criminal liability for the above-mentioned offenses. It is also relevant under civil law, namely liability law, as a so-called "tortious act" and leads to massive claims for damages against all the accused. According to current plans, these will be asserted in the US, Dr. Fuellmich's last place of residence before his abduction and the location of crucial lawyer meetings regarding the coronavirus damages claims, on behalf of Dr. Fuellmich and all his clients (including those in California). However, claims for damages will also be asserted against the state of Lower Saxony and, if necessary, the Federal Republic of Germany as the client of the crimes committed by the BKA, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution, and the State Security Service.
For the sake of completeness, it should be noted that approximately one hour before this email to the accused John, the accused Antonia Fischer had forwarded (once again) Dr. Fuellmich's settlement proposal to settle the dispute over the liability-relevant conduct of the accused "port lawyers," namely the theft of money and the embezzlement of client funds. In that forwarded email, Dr. Fuellmich writes:
"Hello Antonia and Marcel, now that we all know what each of us thinks of the other, I want to make one last attempt at a solution. I would fly to the consulate again and issue a power of attorney for Dagmar if an agreement can be reached, which should be short and concise and read as follows:
1. Marcel transfers the money stolen from me from the purchase agreement to an account specified by Inka.
2. Step by step in exchange for the release of the gold.
3. In addition, Marcel transfers the client funds from the class action or sends a statement so that I can report on this in the next client information letter.
Dagmar will be at Degussa in Berlin with the certified signature and will use it at exactly the right moment to either hand over the gold to Viviane Fischer together with Viviane or liquidate it at (you will have to work out the details with Viviane Fischer and Justus Hoffmann yourselves) once the money is in Inka's possession. After all the months that have now passed, it should be possible to reach an agreement here within a week. Then things would take their course."
Incidentally, it was also clear to BKA officer Götz Knobloch that Dr. Fuellmich could not be arrested in Mexico on the basis of a German or European arrest warrant, but only on the basis of a Mexican arrest warrant (which, however, presupposed a non-existent crime by Dr. Fuellmich or an equally non-existent illegal entry by Dr. Fuellmich into Mexico). This is shown by the email from Götz Knobloch dated August 25, 2023, to the accused LKA officer and executor of the instructions of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security, Lars Roggatz:
"The arrest of the wanted person in Mexico is only possible on the basis of a national (Mexican) arrest warrant. If necessary, it seems sensible to prepare the necessary extradition documents in Germany."
He was therefore also aware that extradition proceedings were required for the legal arrest of Dr. Fuellmich. However, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution and the accused Roggatz and John wanted to avoid this at all costs because, as explained, Dr. Fuellmich would have been granted a legal hearing and it would have been revealed that the German arrest warrant was a complete fake, based on information provided by the accused complainants that was clearly false to any ordinary citizen.
For this reason, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security and the accused Roggatz decided to have Dr. Fuellmich kidnapped and then cover up the whole thing as deportation with the help of the Mexican immigration authorities, who were pressured by the German Embassy (see the testimony offered by the head of the immigration authority and the honorary consul in Tijuana, Carlos Enkerlin). The "smoking gun" exposing the kidnapping is the email from the accused Roggatz to the accused John dated September 1, 2023, which states:
"As things stand at present, the plan is to lure Reiner Fuellmich to the consulate on the pretext that he still has to correct/provide a signature on his passport and have him arrested there by the immigration authorities."
The words "lure" and "pretext" prove that Dr. Fuellmich was to be deceived about passport problems that did not actually exist in order to trick him into flying to Tijuana. The words "have him arrested" prove that the immigration authorities would not (of course) act on their own initiative, but on the instructions of or under pressure from the German Embassy in Mexico or on the instructions of BKA officers Götz Knobloch and Monica Vasquez in Mexico, who were instructed accordingly by the German domestic intelligence service/state security service.
This also explains the behavior of the head of the immigration authorities in Tijuana after Dr. Fuellmich's arrest and the behavior of the honorary consul toward Dr. Fuellmich and his wife. Both apologized to Dr. Fuellmich and his wife, pointing to pressure from Mexico City (= German Embassy) and explaining that they had no idea what this was all about. The head of the immigration authority also shook Dr. Fuellmich's hand and wished him every success and good luck as he was taken by the equally clueless Mexican assistants of the German domestic intelligence service to continue his flight to Mexico City (from Tijuana) and then from Mexico City to Frankfurt.
In fact, the accused Roggatz and John (or rather the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security controlling them) felt compelled to ensure Dr. Fuellmich's abduction at all costs, according to the motto "better safe than sorry." This was because Dr. Fuellmich had indeed had doubts that it was really necessary for him and his wife to fly to Tijuana because of two passports that allegedly needed to be replaced or corrected. He had asked the honorary consul why it would not be possible for the embassy to simply send him the replacement documents, which were allegedly ready, by post.
BKA agent Knobloch refers to this and writes (page 149 of the main file, volume 3):
"Fuellmich contacted the HK (= , Honorary Consul, note by the undersigned) yesterday and informed them that he had found the passports that had been reported lost (note: Whether the passports were ever lost or were merely temporarily removed at the instigation of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution in order to induce Dr. Fuellmich to go to the HK in Tijuana, which is under the control of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution and its auxiliary officers – despite the sovereignty of the Mexican state – for the purpose of obtaining new passports, remains unclear at this time, note by the signatory). He was then told that these passports were being sought by Interpol. (...) Experience has shown that withdrawing the search is no guarantee that departure will proceed without problems. Fuellmich replied that he would collect the replacement documents after all and would now arrange a flight to Tijuana." (This is incorrect, but shows once again how sloppy the work was: If anyone had actually informed Dr. Fuellmich that the passports were subject to an Interpol search, he would certainly not have flown to Tijuana. Instead, Honorary Consul Carlos Enkerlin informed him via WhatsApp message at that he and his wife would have to pick up the replacement passports in person, as they would not be sent by mail—allegedly for security reasons, note by the signatory.)
The email goes on to say:
"If he picks up the replacement documents (i.e., not signatures, as Knobloch claims elsewhere, note by the signatory) from the HK within two weeks, I would suggest proceeding with the arrest/extradition through legal assistance."
This means two things: First, everyone involved was still clear that the only right way to arrest Dr. Fuellmich would be through extradition proceedings. However, as my colleague Dr. Miseré has made clear to the court on several occasions, the comparatively ridiculous accusation of breach of trust, i.e., a mere misdemeanor, and moreover based solely on allegedly unlawful loans under company law, could never lead to an extradition request. This decision not to pursue the extradition proceedings that would normally be required confirms once again that this is not, of course, a case of breach of trust, but rather, as is clear beyond any doubt from the first attempt by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution to remove Dr. Fuellmich from circulation, documented in the files: Dr. Fuellmich should and must be removed from circulation and silenced at all costs because of his politically undesirable work in exposing the Corona measures, which is dangerous for the criminals behind them.
And it shows that the defendants John, Roggatz, and the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security Agency controlling them had all realized that the story with Dr. Fuellmich's passports had made him suspicious, so that the defendant John, to be on the safe side—better safe than sorry – with the help of the accused "port lawyers," that his visit to Tijuana would be decisive in settling the dispute over the funds stolen and embezzled from him and his clients by the "port lawyers." This was because, at the same time as receiving the replacement passports, he would also be able to have a new power of attorney certified by the honorary consul (for his colleague Dagmar Schön, after Prof. Martin Schwab inexplicably suddenly decided he no longer wanted to use his power of attorney), so that the above-mentioned final attempt at a settlement of this matter, which should actually be clarified by the criminal prosecution authorities in Germany, could be made.
Dr. Fuellmich had initiated an urgent civil law action against the "port lawyers," in particular against Marcel Templin, but in doing so had become firmly convinced that the German judiciary, as already demonstrated in thousands of legal disputes against banks and other large corporations, was no longer capable of acting.
And the fact that the Göttingen law enforcement authorities, with very few exceptions, had slipped into lawlessness and arbitrariness had already been brought to light by the New York Times report, referred to several times, about the Göttingen prosecutors who created their own Reich citizens on the internet in order to be able to prosecute, convict, and imprison them. Just how far beyond the applicable law (even if it is "only" the system of law that was created for abuse) the Göttingen judiciary has now moved was demonstrated a few weeks ago in a report on the CBS program "60 Minutes." The report shows how three Göttingen prosecutors – including one who is involved in the proceedings against Dr. Fuellmich – amuse themselves in a truly repulsive manner at the fact that completely normal, non-criminal citizens are woken up early in the morning by special task forces kicking down their doors and then arrested because they allegedly insulted politicians with humorous criticism.
Nevertheless, on September 21, 2023, the accused John, who until then had not conducted any investigations in response to the criminal complaint of September 2, 2022, and certainly had not conducted any investigations exonerating Dr. Fuellmich, even though he was obliged to do so under criminal procedure, once again points out this problem to the accused Roggatz (page 150 of the main file, volume 3):
"Can you tell me the current status of the Fuellmich proceedings regarding the appointment at the HK? Do you also have any detailed information on the usual practice for deportations from Mexico (detention pending deportation, time until departure, etc.)? It would be good to know approximately when he would arrive in Germany, as I still have a lot of investigating to do in the proceedings." (Emphasis added by the signatory)
In doing so, however, the accused John not only reveals that he had not conducted any investigations up to that point (apart from the dedicated lines he maintained with the accused "port lawyers," Viviane Fischer and her lawyer). He also responds to an email from Knobloch, the BKA agent implementing the instructions of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security in Mexico, in which Roggatz rejects the many indications from Knobloch and the accused John that extradition is actually the right course of action and writes (page 153, main file volume 3):
"Dear Mr. John, we should use every opportunity to get Fuellmich deported (i.e., under no circumstances should there be extradition proceedings, note by the undersigned). The HK in Tijuana will ask Fuellmich today (on the instructions of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/Roggatz/Knobloch, note by the undersigned) whether he will pick up the new passports or not. Otherwise, they will be returned to the embassy in Mexico City. As a precaution, we will write to the remaining 10 consulates general and ask them to let us know if Fuellmich contacts any of them (this was Knobloch's response to the concern of the accused Antonia Fischer that Dr. Fuellmich might be able to visit a consulate general other than the one in Tijuana, note by the signatory)."
In an email dated October 4, 2023, the accused John reassures the accused John, who until then had been inexperienced in the usual criminal work of German law enforcement (which Dr. Fuellmich had learned about from countless files from fellow prisoners), and informs him that Knobloch's kidnapping plan would be successful:
"Good morning, Mr. John, I think Mr. Knobloch has done everything possible. I spoke to him on the phone on Monday and he said that Mr. Fuellmich has an appointment with the HK on October 11. That will be our opportunity. Mr. Knobloch has planned everything and I am confident that everything will work out."
That is exactly how it went. Dr. Fuellmich and his wife, successfully deceived by the executive organs of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security, flew to Tijuana on October 11, 2023, where they were arrested at the airport by immigration officials acting on orders and taken to the immigration authorities in an emergency vehicle. There, however, the senior immigration official, who was apparently unaware of the background to this abduction but who also clearly had a very guilty conscience, was unable to answer Dr. Fuellmich's questions about the reason for the arrest and his request for an opportunity to comment on the background to the arrest. He pointed out, almost desperately, that he had received instructions from Mexico City, which he himself did not understand. Dr. Fuellmich then called the German Embassy in Mexico City and asked for help and clarification from the immigration authorities that the new passports with visas were with Honorary Consul Carlos Enkerlin and that Dr. Fuellmich and his wife had agreed with him that he would hand over the passports to them upon their arrival in Tijuana. However, the embassy employee wriggled out of the situation – Dr. Fuellmich's wife heard everything – and said she could do nothing, offering no help whatsoever.
Dr. Fuellmich then informed the head of the immigration authority that Honorary Consul Carlos Enkerlin was expecting him at the airport to hand over the replacement passports, as the consulate's offices were currently being renovated. He also told him that he would be happy to call the honorary consul to clear up this obvious misunderstanding. The distraught but helpful head of the migration authority agreed to this. Honorary Consul Carlos Enkerlin did indeed answer the phone and immediately apologized to Dr. Fuellmich, without really explaining what had happened. He simply told him that he was unable to do anything because he had received instructions from the German Embassy in Mexico City. Dr. Fuellmich then asked him to explain this to the head of the immigration office, , and, above all, to inform him that there were no immigration problems because Dr. Fuellmich would receive the new passports from him, Carlos Enkerlin, as agreed. The Honorary Consul did so and spoke about it – in Spanish – with the head of the migration authority. After the phone call, the latter looked very concerned, but then allowed Dr. Fuellmich and his wife to speak to a doctor first (see the doctor's certificate on page 34, main file volume 4).
He then informed Dr. Fuellmich that he was being forced to fly him back to Germany by two employees of the immigration authorities and apologized repeatedly for this. He said he knew that something was wrong, but unfortunately there was nothing he could do. When Dr. Fuellmich's wife began to cry, he told her that she would be able to fly back to her dogs the next morning. Strangely, the "pressure" from Mexico City only affected Dr. Fuellmich. He also knew that this was not really a case of deportation. He had therefore given instructions that Dr. Fuellmich should not be transported in a large bus with the many people who were actually being deported, but alone, accompanied only by the two immigration officials, in a minibus. He then apologized again to Dr. Fuellmich and wished him good luck, shaking his hand fervently.
It was clear to all those involved who knew about the abduction that took place here, i.e., at least the accused Roggatz and the accused John, but of course also the officials in Mexico who carried out the orders of the State Security Service/State Security and the BKA, were of course aware that they were committing a serious crime, namely a crime that also violated the sovereignty of the country of Mexico and would ultimately lead to an international incident that would make international headlines. This would certainly be the case if it came to light, especially in connection with the prevention of the Corona investigation by an internationally respected, prominent advocate of this investigation. That is why they did everything they could to cover up and disguise this kidnapping as a simple deportation.
The defendant Schindler was also informed of this at the latest when he saw the public prosecutor's files. This is because on page 33, volume 4 of the main file, there is a "deportation order" from the Mexican immigration authorities in Tijuana, dated October 11, 2023, which Schindler himself expressly referred to in writing and which is immediately recognizable as a fake. The first paragraph of this document states that it concerns a deportation pursuant to Section 144 of the Mexican Immigration Act. However, a glance at this section shows that the conditions for deportation are not met in any way, as deportation is only possible if the person to be deported has either entered the country illegally or committed a (serious) crime in Mexico. Neither of these was obviously the case. Apart from that, the fact that Dr. Fuellmich's wife, who allegedly had the same "passport problems" – it was said that she too should fly to Tijuana for this reason – was allowed to fly back to her Mexican place of residence in without further ado shows that this was an obvious fake. This is also clear to the defendant Schindler, who expressly referred to this deportation order to justify that no abduction had taken place. In order to conceal the fact that the deportation order he referred to was recognizable as a fake, he refused, contrary to the principle governing all German court proceedings that "the language of the court is German," to have the document, which was only in Spanish in the file, translated into German at the request of attorney Dr. Miseré, even though Dr. Fuellmich's defense team had proven in detail that the deportation order was a fake created by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security/BKA.
Just how amateurish this attempt at concealment actually was – and that even this deep state, specifically the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security, cannot control everyone involved – is shown by the content of the arrest report by police officer Lamshöft dated October 13, 2023, at Frankfurt Airport. This "arrest report" (no arrest had been possible in Mexico, only a kidnapping) states under the heading:
"Special notes
"On October 13, at around 2:45 p.m., the OG person (Dr. Fuellmich, note by the signatory) arrived as an escorted extradition from Mexico with two escort officers from the Mexican border police; the person is subject to an existing arrest warrant issued by the Göttingen District Court (...) for breach of trust." (emphasis added by the signatory)
The officer explained to Dr. Fuellmich that she had included this "special note" because she and her colleagues were surprised that an extradition had been granted for a mere misdemeanor (the alleged breach of trust is no longer an issue, it is not a crime!) had been issued, especially since the arrest warrant also shows that it is only a matter of corporate law and an amount of allegedly 700,000 euros.
Apparently, the defendants Roggatz and John had only pretended to be deported in Mexico in order to deceive the head of the immigration authorities. However, they had led the German airport police and the federal police there to believe what appeared to be the case anyway: that an accompanied extradition was taking place. This is because in the case of deportation, when one country wants to get rid of a citizen of another country because of crimes they have committed or because of illegal entry, the person to be deported is simply put on a plane and then flown out unaccompanied at the expense of the deporting country. In this case, however, the accused Roggatz, John, and, of course, the authorities controlling them wanted to ensure that Dr. Fuellmich could not escape them under any circumstances. They therefore requested the German federal police at Frankfurt Airport to arrest Dr. Fuellmich on the plane on the basis of the German arrest warrant and informed them that this was an "escorted extradition."
This was the only way to explain to the federal police that Dr. Fuellmich had been accompanied by two immigration police officers. This would not have happened in the case of deportation, at least not at the expense of the state of Lower Saxony or the Federal Republic of Germany.
What was in fact a kidnapping disguised as deportation in Mexico had to be presented as extradition in Germany in order to correspond to the outward appearance of extradition created by the accused.
This had, of course, already been clear to the defendants in Mexico, as can be seen from the email sent on October 4, 2023, by Götz Knobloch, the BKA officer carrying out the German instructions in Mexico, to the defendant John (with the defendant Roggatz and the Mexican BKA officer Vazquez in cc):
"We will have to make a binding booking for at least the Tijuana-Mexico City flight in the next two days. The intercontinental flight will only be booked once the arrest has been made. In this context, I would also like to know whether your authority will cover the costs of one or two nights' accommodation for the accompanying Mexican immigration officials." (Page 159, main file volume 3)
If this had been a genuine deportation, then of course the country initiating the deportation, in this case Mexico, would have paid the costs, as this deportation would have been in its interest. However, this was not a deportation, but rather an abduction initiated by Germany that not only deprived Dr. Fuellmich of his liberty, but also violated the national sovereignty of Mexico. However, due to the fact that Dr. Fuellmich was accompanied by two immigration officials and that all travel expenses were paid by the state of Lower Saxony (as one of the two officials had already admitted to Dr. Fuellmich on the plane), this abduction had the outward appearance of an extradition. As the quoted communication between the accused John, the accused Roggatz, and the BKA officer Knobloch shows, extradition proceedings would have been the only correct way to arrest Dr. Fuellmich in Mexico. However, this was not chosen, meaning that no extradition request was filed with the Higher Regional Court in Braunschweig and no extradition proceedings were carried out, because such a move would have immediately been noticed as completely unusual, given that what was being faked here was a mere civil law offense with a maximum value in dispute of 700,000 euros—that was all they could come up with. However, since the arresting officers at Frankfurt Airport had to be given a plausible explanation for this outward appearance, they were told that it was an accompanied extradition.
However, given the strangeness of this alleged extradition (arrest warrant and – apparent – extradition because of a mere corporate law problem at resulting in a criminal offense with damages of only up to €700,000), the officers became suspicious and therefore wrote the above-quoted "special note."
After the abduction, which the accused chose to describe as either deportation or extradition, Dr. Fuellmich was held in Frankfurt for one day, then held for several days in Frankfurt prison, where Dr. Fuellmich met Prince Reuss, the alleged Reich citizen, and Hanno Berger, the inventor of the Cum-Ex deals, and was able to talk to both of them at length. He was then transported from Frankfurt to Kassel, where he spent a night in a completely filthy, rat-infested prison from the mid-19th century before being transferred to the high-security prison in Rosdorf, Göttingen, on October 18, 2023.
b) The course of the court proceedings: from the exposure of the arrest warrant of March 15, 2023, on November 1, 2023, as false and to be revoked, to the concealment of this exposure by the accused Schindler on December 19, 2023, to the invention of new allegations on May 3, 2024
aa) The exposure of the arrest warrant issued by way of perversion of justice as false and the concealment of this exposure first by Judge Moog at the Local Court and then by the defendant Schindler.
For the announcement of the arrest warrant and the first judicial hearing, Dr. Fuellmich was brought before the district court judge named Moog on November 1, 2023, accompanied by attorney Wörmer. This was the same judge who, on March 15, 2023, blindly and without any review had signed the arrest warrant written by the defendant John, which was based exclusively on false information provided by the accused "port lawyers" and was therefore false and, due to the incompetence of the defendant John, even more false. "port lawyers" and therefore equally false or – due to the incompetence of the accused John – even more false. In doing so, the appearance was finally (at least) created that Dr. Fuellmich would be granted a legal hearing. According to the Code of Criminal Procedure, this should have happened long before, and because of the blatant contradictions between the criminal complaint of September 2, 2023, and Dr. Fuellmich's email of August 26, 2023, which was attached to the criminal complaint, it should have happened in October 2023 at the latest, but it was repeatedly denied by the accused John (see above). Despite the astonishingly hostile behavior of the judge at the Moog District Court, who apparently felt caught out and repeatedly tried to obstruct Dr. Fuellmich in his testimony, it was nevertheless possible to expose the gross errors in the arrest warrant (and thus its invalidity, which should have led to the arrest warrant being revoked and Dr. Fuellmich being released). At that time, Dr. Fuellmich and the defense still believed that these were mere "errors."
At this point, it should be noted that – in contrast to Anglo-American law, for example – at the Regional Court, where serious crimes are tried ( ), no one records the statements and explanations of the court, the public prosecutor, the defense, or the witnesses. There, the judge can – as happened here with the defendant Schindler – make up stories and statements that have nothing whatsoever to do with what actually happened in court. Surprisingly, this is not the case in the local court. There, a court reporter (in this case, a female court reporter) writes everything down.
On November 1, 2023, Dr. Fuellmich then completely clarified all the errors in the arrest warrant. The arrest warrant of March 15, 2023 contains three central false claims.
First, the arrest warrant assumes that the shareholders of the Corona Committee (or the Corona Committee preliminary association, which never came into existence) can only make decisions jointly, i.e., that no one has "sole power of management."
Second, the arrest warrant assumes that Dr. Fuellmich simply took €200,000 from the donations without any reasonable reason, i.e., without a loan agreement.
Thirdly, and decisively, the arrest warrant ultimately assumes that Dr. Fuellmich
"was not willing to repay the money from the outset (...)" (see pages 141, 142, main file volume 2).
According to pages 49 and 50 of the main file, volume 3, Dr. Fuellmich stated before the district court, Judge Moog (who, mind you, had issued the arrest warrant at the request of the accused John himself, by blindly signing the form filled out by John):
"Yes, I received the funds as a loan. My property was my security (...) The committee was founded by me and Ms. Fischer, the other two joined later (...) I concluded the loan agreement with Ms. Viviane Fischer. We wanted to protect the money from arbitrary access (the word 'by the authorities' is missing – note by the signatory) (...) At that time, the company consisted only of Ms. Fischer and myself (...) We were both (the words 'also previously' are missing – note by the signatory) solely authorized to manage the company (...) Templin withdrew 1.3 million euros from the sale of the house, and he also has the 700,000 euros."
So, on November 1, 2023, it was finally clarified at this hearing what had been concealed in the public prosecutor's file and remained concealed until November 1, 2023, due to the complete failure to investigate the accused John (who refused to be questioned by police investigator Spörhase, as required, and by Viviane Fischer).
Why, this is the crucial question, was the arrest warrant not immediately revoked and Dr. Fuellmich released after the arrest warrant was exposed as gross nonsense? Because it was never about a crime, but only about preventing Dr. Fuellmich from continuing his Corona educational work with the help of a fake crime invented by the defendants John and Schindler on the instructions of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security.
However, despite all attempts to conceal the true facts, the further course of the proceedings confirmed everything that Dr. Fuellmich had stated on November 1, 2023, at the Göttingen District Court before Judge Moog. The hostility and bias of the judge at the Moog District Court is evident, for example, in the fact that he only allowed Dr. Fuellmich to speak after he had said to him in a downright malicious hiss that Dr. Fuellmich considered all German judges to be controlled puppets – which is almost true, at least clearly and unambiguously applicable to the judges and prosecutors accused here. Nevertheless, Judge Moog was unable to prevent the above statements from being recorded by the court reporter – even though he actively sought to prevent this: When Dr. Fuellmich requested a legal hearing not only for the defense but also for himself personally, Judge Moog stated that he was simply not interested in what Dr. Fuellmich had to say. This shocked not only attorney Wörmer, but even the defendant John. For he was (he was only a probationary prosecutor and still completely inexperienced) still inexperienced in the criminal behavior patterns that have become commonplace in the German judiciary (Dr. Fuellmich has been able to read dozens of investigation files from other fellow prisoners).
bb) The attempt by the defendant Schindler on November 19, 2023, to conceal the content of the minutes of November 1, 2023, which led to the revocation of the arrest warrant and the release of Dr. Fuellmich, in order to keep Dr. Fuellmich in custody and thus massively impede his ability to defend himself
The content of the minutes of the hearing before Judge Moog at the District Court on November 1, 2023, which completely destroyed the arrest warrant, was now, to the horror of the defendant Schindler in particular, not only out in the open, but also in the file. And since the defense had received a copy of the minutes of November 1, 2023, the file could no longer be "cleaned up" without a trace.
First, however, the defendant Schindler attempted to have Dr. Fuellmich's statements recorded at the district court on November 1, 2023, removed from the record. When attorney Wörmer requested a detention review hearing for the defendant Schindler, he initially wanted to conduct it without oral proceedings so that nothing would have to be recorded. Only after a complaint by attorney Wörmer was he then (presumably grudgingly) willing to hold an oral hearing for the detention review on December 19, 2023. However, since – as mentioned above – no one at the Regional Court takes minutes and the accused Schindler was therefore able to write whatever he wanted and omit whatever he wanted, not a single word of what Dr. Fuellmich had explained to him, as he had previously explained to the judge at the Moog Local Court, about the completely false criminal complaint and the arrest warrant based on it, can be found in the so-called minutes. Dr. Fuellmich and defense attorneys Wörmer and Schön negotiated for an hour and a half (from 10:05 a.m. to 11:27 a.m.), which is much longer than at the district court under Judge Moog, and explained the true facts of the case at this detention review hearing on December 19, 2023, in much greater detail than they had previously done before Judge Moog at the district court. However, none of this is reflected in the minutes prepared by the defendant Schindler, which contain only a single sentence:
"The facts and legal situation were discussed." (Page 2 of the decision of the accused Schindler dated December 19, 2023)
Subsequently, the defendant Schindler apparently still assumed, or hoped, that he would be able to make this truth (namely that the arrest warrant had been completely destroyed, had to be lifted immediately, and Dr. Fuellmich had to be released immediately) disappear again through skillful manipulative negotiation. This hope was not entirely unjustified. This is because, as mentioned above, there is no court reporter at the Regional Court who records everything. Instead, the presiding judge can decide for himself, undisturbed and effectively unaccountable, what he allows to be recorded in the minutes, and can reverse or omit all statements made by the defense, the prosecution, the witnesses, and, of course, his own. Ultimately, the accused Schindler, for example, completely omitted from the minutes statements made by the witness Viviane Fischer that would have refuted his invention announced on May 3, 2024.
However, the minutes taken by Judge Moog at the District Court on November 1, 2023, which exposed the entire arrest warrant as false, apparently triggered a panic reaction on the part of the defendant John. For, as can be seen from the investigation file (page 87, main file volume 4), he called Viviane Fischer's defense attorney at the time, former public prosecutor Willanzheimer, on the same day, as attorney Willanzheimer noted at the beginning of the letter he sent to the defendant John on November 12, 2023:
"Dear Mr. Prosecutor John,
With reference to the telephone conversation held on November 1, 2023 (...)"
cc The files of the public prosecutor's office withheld from the defense and the incompleteness of these files
This telephone call between the defendant John and the former public prosecutor and now defense counsel for Viviane Fischer in response to the events of November 1, 2023, is of crucial importance in the following. This is where the idea for the accused Schindler was born, which he invented on May 3, 2024, in response to being contacted by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security.
However, the letter of November 12, 2023, just mentioned, was in the main file, volume 4. And this main file, volume 4, had been withheld from the defense by the public prosecutor's office, along with so much else (dozens of telephone calls and documents relevant to the decision). Attorney Wörmer only became aware of this withholding of this file when the defendant John referred to volume 4 of the main file in his draft indictment of November 17, 2023. She therefore requested the court on November 24, 2023, to submit volume 4, which, as it turned out, was essential for the perversion of justice by the defendant Schindler (page 153, main file volume 4):
"(...) access to the files is requested again and, in particular, immediate transmission of volume 4 of the main file mentioned in the draft indictment sent on November 23, 2023."
dd) The course of action pursued by the defendant Schindler until May 3, 2024, to convict Dr. Fuellmich for allegedly unlawful loans under company law
After all, the defendant Schindler had seen that the minutes of Dr. Fuellmich's hearing before Judge Moog at the Local Court on November 1, 2023, could be dangerous to him in one crucial respect for his mission to have Dr. Fuellmich convicted. This concerns the allegations made by the defendant John in the arrest warrant of March 15, 2023, and subsequently in the indictment of November 17, 2023, that Dr. Fuellmich did not have sole power of management (page 1, middle of the indictment of November 17, 2023 = page 118, main file volume 4). If that had been the case, i.e. if Dr. Fuellmich had not had sole power of management, it would have been relatively easy to sentence Dr. Fuellmich to a prison term, as desired by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security. If Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer had concluded loan agreements even though, according to the articles of association of the company , they would have needed a resolution supported by the two substitute partners Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, then the public would also have been able to understand a conviction. This is because the loan agreements concluded would then have been null and void, at least in the opinion of the defendant John, who is not familiar with civil law.
In contrast, however, Dr. Fuellmich had clearly stated in the hearing on November 1, 2023, and this had therefore been clearly recorded in the minutes, that he was indeed solely authorized to manage the company. In order to verify this, the defendant Schindler, who had become nervous because he was gradually realizing the sloppy work of the defendant John, obtained the complete articles of association of the company from the notary Michelsburg in Berlin and found that Dr. Fuellmich had told the truth, meaning that the criminal complaint, arrest warrant, and indictment were false in this respect.
But there was still the allegation that Dr. Fuellmich had never intended to repay the loan and was therefore not willing or able to repay the loan when the loan agreements were concluded. The defendant Schindler wanted to pursue this course of action, which was still contrary to company law. – apparently unaware that the inexperienced defendant John, due to a lack of any investigation, did not know who he had been forced to get involved with, namely – as became abundantly clear during the proceedings – the disastrous consequences of the indictment, namely the "port lawyers" Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann.
Accordingly, the defendant Schindler began as planned with the examination of the witnesses named by the defendant John in his list, with the continued aim of convicting Dr. Fuellmich for loans contrary to company law.
The following should be added regarding the role of the allegedly independent presiding judge Schindler: Because he had of course now noticed that the defendant John, as a completely inexperienced prosecutor on probation, was a total failure and hardly participated in the oral proceedings at all, the defendant Schindler immediately took over his role as prosecutor. This is nowhere more evident than in his replacement on May 3, 2024, of the facts charged and prosecuted until May 3, 2024 (loans contrary to company law) with new facts freely invented by the defendant Schindler (after contact was made by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security) on May 3, 2024, for new facts that were freely invented (violation of a far-fetched and unsubstantiated "secret agreement"). This is because the defendant John had not, as the defendant Schindler announced on May 3, 2024, charged that
1. there had been loan agreements,
2. but that a sham transaction agreement had also been concluded, according to which these loan agreements were to be null and void,
3. in order to conceal a trust agreement,
4. according to which Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer (or only Dr. Fuellmich) were to keep the donated money as a liquidity reserve in another account.
And the defendant John also failed to adapt his arrest warrant and indictment to this complex invention of the defendant Schindler until the verdict was handed down on April 24, 2025.
In any case, the main hearing began with the examination of witnesses Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann. And this examination proved to be a disaster for the prosecution and the court. When questioned by Dr. Fuellmich and the defense, Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann had to admit that they had not been informed of the settlement talks between Martin Schwab and Dr. Fuellmich in March 2023, which were mediated by Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab, with Dr. Fuellmich, about the money stolen from him and the gold available only to the two remaining active shareholders, Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich, had only been recorded for appearances' sake in order to have Dr. Fuellmich arrested and locked up on behalf of and in close cooperation with the defendant John (and the Verfassungsschutz/State Security behind him). have Dr. Fuellmich arrested and locked up. When, of all people, the author of the criminal complaint, which was false from start to finish (see above), Justus Hoffmann, who, together with Marcel Templin and Antonia Fischer, had stolen Dr. Fuellmich's money so that Dr. Fuellmich would not be able to repay the loan, hatefully declared he was looking forward to the day when he would no longer have to see Dr. Fuellmich locked away, it caused a kind of horrified astonishment not only among the defense, but also among the public, the audience in the courtroom. For one would have expected something different from a thief, blackmailer, and key accomplice in a kidnapping and deprivation of liberty. Well, as things progressed, his severe mental disorder (cf. his calls for murder and "Dominatrix" publications) became obvious.
Nevertheless, the statements made by Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, and subsequently also by Viviane Fischer, lawyer Tobias Weissenborn, and Jens Kuhn, that there were indeed openly disclosed loan agreements for everything, which can also be found in the books of the Corona Committee, that there had been no secret misappropriation of donations, and that there was a very good reason for taking out the loans, as Viviane Fischer also confirmed, namely the imminent seizure of the Corona Committee's donation account. In addition, it was clarified and even expressly stated in writing by the accused Schindler on several occasions afterwards that Dr. Fuellmich (as described in his email of August 26, 2022) would have repaid the loan without any problems if the "port lawyers" had not succeeded (under the eyes and with the protection of prosecutor John and the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security) in stealing Dr. Fuellmich's money. With the help of the defense's hard-won examination of witness Joseph Baron, who corroborated the statements of attorney Tobias Weissenborn and the explanations of Dr. Fuellmich, it was further clarified that Dr. Fuellmich was able at any time, namely within a few days, to repay the loan in the event of a liquidity crisis of the Corona Committee, which in reality never occurred liquidity crisis of the Corona Committee, with the help of friends such as attorney Tobias Weissenborn, Joseph Baron, Dr. Mike Yeadon, and others.
This meant that, as the doyen of commentary on the breach of trust clause, Prof. Dr. Bernd Schünemann, had explained in an email to the defense, which was also read out in court, the accusation of breach of trust due to loans allegedly contrary to company law was completely settled. In particular, based on the statements of Viviane Fischer, who confirmed her written comments on the criminal complaint, it was clear that it was not a matter of information provided by the two completely inactive substitute shareholders Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, who were only interested in donation money and, on behalf of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security, had been seeking to damage the Corona Committee since summer 2021.
And that is why, at this moment, at the end of April 2024, the proceedings for breach of trust due to loans contrary to company law should have been dropped again and Dr. Fuellmich should have been released immediately.
IV. Instead of revoking the arrest warrant after the failure of the charges of "loans contrary to company law" and releasing Dr. Fuellmich, the accused Schindler announced on May 3, 2024, after being contacted by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security, that it was no longer a matter of "loans contrary to company law," but from now on a matter of violation of a secret agreement.State Security, that it was no longer a matter of "loans contrary to company law" but, with immediate effect, of a breach of a secret agreement.
Thus, at the end of April 2024, after questioning about half of the witnesses named by the public prosecutor's office in a list, the charges of breach of trust based on allegedly loans contrary to company law had failed, and the arrest warrant should have been lifted immediately, the proceedings discontinued, and Dr. Fuellmich released. However, from the point of view of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security, which was controlling the entire proceedings against Dr. Fuellmich, this had to be prevented at all costs. For, as the investigation file itself proves, from the outset it was never about a criminal offense, but always only about to remove Dr. Fuellmich from circulation because of his work in exposing the coronavirus pandemic and thus prevent the international legal investigation of the planned pandemic, planned by a group of international lawyers (and already rehearsed with the Model Grand Jury proceedings), from beginning at both the criminal and civil (i.e., damages) levels.
1. The findings of the Corona Committee's investigative work had reached millions of people worldwide, who had now formed their own opinions by comparing them with the statements made by politicians and the mainstream media.
In the meantime, millions of people worldwide had been able to form their own opinions based on the interviews Dr. Fuellmich had conducted with numerous respected experts and had come to the conclusion that there was no pandemic, but rather a carefully planned "plandemic" whose planners and backers did not shy away from causing serious bodily harm or severely damaging the international economy. For the interviews had also revealed that the ultimate goal behind it all was, on the one hand, to achieve a massive "population reduction" by panicking the population into "voluntarily" rushing to get the untested injections. At the same time, the severe and most serious side effects, including damage to the immune system, as the interviews also showed, drove the population into dependence on the pharmaceutical industry and apparatus medicine. On the other hand, the interviews had shown that the measures planned and enforced with military assistance also served to gain total control over the population through the introduction of digital technologies ("technocracy"), including the abolition of cash and the introduction of so-called CBDC (Central Bank Digital Currency), but also digital vaccination cards and passports under the guise of "health care." The targeted destruction of crafts and small and medium-sized enterprises served to centrally control the supply of goods to the people via large corporations such as Amazon.
It was clear to anyone who had looked at the relevant information in the alternative media, compared it with the information provided by the mainstream media, which ignored and obscured all of this, and then formed their own opinion that all of this was a serious crime against humanity.
That is why an ever-growing number of people not only welcome the legal review based on this information—that is, the establishment of justice—but are demanding it.
At the same time, this knowledge and the resulting demands for criminal and civil justice (i.e., massive compensation on an unprecedented scale) are no longer limited to a small group of people who can be labeled "conspiracy theorists," "right-wing extremist," and "anti-Semitic," prosecuting them and thus excluding them from public discourse. Rather, this increasingly vocal call for legal redress has now entered the mainstream in all countries, although it has so far been defused by the responsible perpetrators and their puppets in politics and the mainstream media holding mere sham discussions about the more harmless coronavirus measures such as mask mandates and school closures in order to
– admit to the smallest misjudgments and thus distract from the deliberate destruction of health and the economy that lies behind it all, and
– on the other hand, immediately demanding that we be even better prepared for the "next pandemic, which is undoubtedly just around the corner" (i.e., the planned pandemic) and, ideally, by giving the WHO and its director Tedros the power to declare a pandemic at their own discretion when the opportunity arises, suspending the sovereignty of member states and, if necessary, ordering a climate lockdown—though without the US, since the Trump administration has once again withdrawn from the WHO.
No one needs to be told that this pseudo-explanation of the coronavirus measures has nothing to do with the genuine legal clarification and justice demanded by the public, but is simply a continuation of the unresolved crimes against humanity.
2. The demand for a legal investigation into the pandemic is now also being made by respected public figures, and a ruling by the Osnabrück Administrative Court on September 3, 2024, found that there was no scientific basis for the measures, only a political one, and that the "vaccinations" were completely ineffective.
The Corona education campaign, as conducted in particular by Dr. Fuellmich in collaboration with many other people, and the planned legal review, as exemplified by the group of international lawyers and Dr. Fuellmich in the Model Grand Jury proceedings, is not only in no way punishable. It is even demanded by a majority of the German population (and even more so by the international population), and by no means by people who could be labeled "conspiracy theorists," "right-wing extremists," or "anti-Semites" and thus silence them, but also by, among others, the former president of Germany's highest court, the Federal Constitutional Court, Prof. Dr. Hans-Jürgen Papier, which is now also largely corrupt. The following quote is instructive in this regard:
"Legislation and administration, but with restrictions also the judiciary, in particular that of the Federal Constitutional Court, have not always sufficiently observed and enforced the requirements of the rule of law in connection with the fight against the pandemic."
Prof. Papier explained this in a guest article for the magazine "Cicero," adding:
"A state that attempts to relieve its citizens of all personal risks becomes itself a risk to the freedom of society."
Arguments that necessity knows no law, that the (good) end justifies the means, and that there should be no red lines in the fight against a pandemic, as the still-Chancellor Scholz proclaimed in December 2021, should, in Papier's opinion, be clearly rejected in a
"liberal constitutional state, even in times of emergency and crisis."
For, according to Papier:
"There is absolutely no doubt that the fundamental rights enshrined in the Basic Law must also apply in times of emergency. Our constitutional order does not recognize a state of emergency that would allow for the complete or even partial suspension of fundamental rights."
Papier therefore calls for a legal review. He argues that this has not been done by the courts in general and the Constitutional Court in particular. As a result,
"even at the end of the pandemic, the state of knowledge in many areas is not much better (...) than it was at the beginning of the epidemic."
Such a situation must not be allowed to happen again, and he therefore calls for
"All these questions must be examined by legal scholars so that in future similar crises, the rule of law is better equipped from a legal perspective."
Here, however, in this sham trial for breach of trust, Dr. Fuellmich is to be taken out of circulation because of his exposure of the pandemic. And here, the exact opposite is happening. Not only do the files from the first trial prove with every word that Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke was asked to invent a criminal offense against Dr. Fuellmich in order to take him out of circulation because of his Corona information work (see above). The files from the second trial also prove this.
This is particularly clear from page 1 of the second case against Dr. Fuellmich, which contains only the word "corona." And as the renewed references by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security to the "corona connection" and the alleged proximity to the "Querdenker scene" (literally "lateral thinkers," a term used by right-wing extremists and conspiracy theorists) prove, the aim is still to removing Dr. Fuellmich from circulation not because of any criminal offense, but because of his Corona educational work and his intended international legal investigation. Only this second attempt is laboriously disguised as a quasi-criminal proceeding for breach of trust.
The action against Dr. Fuellmich is therefore preventing precisely what is being expressly demanded not only by a growing section of the world's population and the US Secretary of Health, but also by the former president of the Constitutional Court, Papier.
Once again: According to the findings available to date from the Corona Committee, which worked scientifically until Dr. Fuellmich was removed, and from the equally scientific ICIC, which have been confirmed by the Model Grand jury process involving genuine international lawyers, a genuine judge, and genuine scientific and other witnesses, there was no new deadly coronavirus. Instead, despite all the "gain of function" invocations, there was only the seasonal flu, which was completely suppressed by the panicked outcry over "corona." And, as the work of Dr. Fuellmich and his colleagues shows, there was a deliberate, globally coordinated panic campaign carried out with the help of at least three clearly military-structured maneuvers ("Operation Dark Winter" in late summer 2001, the "Lockstep" exercise in 2010, and "Event 201" in October 2019). The measures implemented with the help of this panic-mongering, in particular the lockdowns and the so-called "vaccinations," have proven to be destructive and deadly. What is being kept secret by the mainstream media and puppet politicians, however, is that the will of large sections of the population has now borne fruit. For example, it is being concealed that even a German court, namely the Osnabrück Administrative Court, ruled on September 3, 2024, under case number 3 A 224/22, on the basis of the redacted RKI protocols and the interrogation of the new (but already active during Corona at the RKI) head of the RKI, that
a) there was no scientific basis for assuming a pandemic, but that all measures were politically motivated and ordered, and
b) the so-called "vaccinations" did not protect against anything at all.
In other words, the defendants here, especially Schindler, show through their criminal behavior described here, which isn't just limited to perverting justice, that they're just as much puppets of those responsible for the pandemic as the puppets who were at the center of the Model Grand Jury investigation, including Tedros from the WHO, Fauci (as chief health advisor in the US, who is thoroughly corrupt, as Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has proven in his best-selling book "The Real Anthony Fauci"), but also the German chief health advisor Drosten, who adorns himself with fake academic titles, and German Chancellor Merkel and Chancellor Scholz, who were informed by the BND (German Federal Intelligence Service) as early as the beginning of 2020 that something was wrong with the pandemic, but deliberately kept this secret from the German population.
3. When the prospect of a short trial followed by the quiet disappearance of Dr. Fuellmich at the end of April 2024 vanished into thin air, the accused Schindler was contacted by the German domestic intelligence service and asked to push for a quick conviction of Dr. Fuellmich and a long prison sentence despite everything.
In any case, the expectation of a quick trial did not come to fruition: Since, contrary to the plan recorded by police investigator Spörhase, not a single witness, let alone the accused Dr. Fuellmich, had been questioned before his abduction and arrest, the evidence hearing conducted by the chamber of the accused Schindler, which was now virtually "cold," proved to be a disaster for the accused Schindler. And this was only shortly after the prosecution had begun to work through half of its witness list. (What would have happened if the defense witnesses had also been heard?) For everything that the court had at its disposal on the basis of the content of , the criminal complaint of September 2, 2022, the arrest warrant of March 15, 2023, and then the indictment of November 17, 2023, which had been envisaged in order to secure a quick conviction of Dr. Fuellmich to a long prison sentence for allegedly violating company law, had proven to be false.11.2023, in order to obtain a quick conviction of Dr. Fuellmich to a long prison sentence for allegedly illegal loans under company law, had proven to be false, and this – it cannot be emphasized enough – based solely on the statements of some of the witnesses named by the prosecution itself and never heard before. The house of cards built on false allegations had collapsed with a crash. In order to achieve their goal of a long prison sentence for Dr. Fuellmich, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution and the State Security Service now had to drop all pretences.
According to information obtained by defense attorney Dr. Miseré from a long-standing trusted colleague at the BND, at the end of April 2024, the accused Schindler was contacted by employees/representatives of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security and asked to bring about, by any means necessary and as quickly as possible, a conviction of Dr. Fuellmich to the longest possible prison sentence. This was because, in the meantime, large sections of the global public had become aware of the proceedings, and there was unrest everywhere. Presumably, Schindler was informed during this contact that Viviane Fischer's lawyer and former senior public prosecutor Willanzheimer had responded to a telephone call for help from the accused John on November 1, 2024 (when the arrest warrant had imploded) on November 12, 2024, with an idea for new allegations against Dr. Fuellmich. This will be discussed in detail below.
4. Regarding the idea for new allegations against Dr. Fuellmich communicated by the former senior public prosecutor and current lawyer of Viviane Fischer on November 12, 2023, in response to the call for help from the accused John on November 1, 2023, and the related legal notice of May 3, 2024
In any case, the accused Schindler responded to these demands on May 3, 2024, by issuing a legal notice.
a) Regarding the legal notice dated May 3, 2024, issued by the defendant Schindler, containing new allegations and simultaneously abruptly terminating the taking of evidence
With this "legal notice," the defendant Schindler declared that, as of that moment, the case would no longer concern "corporate loans." Instead, based on a chat conversation between Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich from July 2022 (i.e., well over a year after the loan agreements were concluded) and two emails written before the loan agreements were concluded, he had come to the conclusion that there were no loan agreements at all, but only a secret agreement between Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer that had been violated by Dr. Fuellmich. Although this agreement did not exist in writing or verbally, it was nevertheless "implied," i.e., it had come about through the so-called "conclusive behavior" of Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich. Apart from the fact that these allegations by the defendant Schindler are utter nonsense under civil law (see below), he explained the "secret agreement" he invented as follows:
1. Yes, Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer had concluded loan agreements with each other concerning part of the donation money.
2. But before or after or at the same time (this remains completely unclear), both had also agreed that these loan agreements should be null and void, i.e., Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich had concluded a sham transaction agreement within the meaning of Section 117 of the German Civil Code (BGB) concerning the loan agreements (again, it remains unclear whether this was to apply to only one, two, or all three loan agreements).
3. This served to conceal the fact that in reality a (or several, again it remains unclear whether this should apply to only one, two or all loan agreements) trust agreement had been concluded between Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer.
4. And on the basis of this trust agreement, the donation money withdrawn via a "bogus loan agreement" had to be kept in a private account as a "liquidity reserve" (whether this should apply only to Dr. Fuellmich's money or also to Viviane Fischer's money remains unclear).
However, because Dr. Fuellmich did not do this, but instead used the money privately as if it were a private loan, in particular to make significant (value-enhancing) investments in his Göttingen property, he violated this (complex) secret agreement and thus now (and no longer because of loans contrary to company law) fulfilled the elements of breach of trust. This is not changed by the fact that Dr. Fuellmich, as the defendant Schindler had repeatedly stated in writing, had always been willing and able, due to the high value of the unencumbered property in Göttingen (and also the high value of the likewise unencumbered ranch in Northern California), repay the money within a few days with the help of his friends, for example Joseph Baron, lawyer Tobias Weissenborn, or Dr. Mike Yeadon, in the event of a liquidity crisis of the Corona Committee (which, however, never occurred), and that he would have repaid the loan in any case with the proceeds from the sale of the Göttingen property.
Furthermore, the fact that Dr. Fuellmich had stolen the money intended for the loan repayment (as described in the email of August 26, 2020) – of all people! – had been stolen from the complainants and "port lawyers" under the eyes and with the protection of the Göttingen public prosecutor's office.
However, because the accused Schindler was aware that his construction would, in a sense, collapse at the slightest disturbance (and convict him of perversion of justice), he ordered, at the same time as inventing the legally and factually untenable construction, that the taking of evidence be terminated immediately that the remaining witnesses on the public prosecutor's list would no longer be heard, and certainly not any witnesses for the defense who would refute his, Schindler's, invention. On page 6, in the penultimate paragraph of his "legal note," he writes (after deliberately making a false statement in the previous sentence that "the instrument of an ankle bracelet is not available in Lower Saxony to avoid detention, so that exemption from detention is ruled out from this point of view alone (...)") clearly and unambiguously:
"It is further pointed out that, with regard to the charge of breach of trust, the Chamber does not consider it necessary to hear any further witnesses after the examination of witnesses Kuhn and Weissenborn has been completed (...)".
At this point, it must be emphasized once again that all arguments used by the accused Schindler, Dr. Fuellmich to the "severe prison sentence" repeatedly invoked by Schindler in all decisions to uphold the (long since proven false) arrest warrant, are clearly beyond his legal competence, namely in civil law.
This was already evident in his first attempt, namely the attempt to obtain a quick conviction of Dr. Fuellmich to a long prison sentence in a short trial on the charge of "loans contrary to company law." The question of whether a loan from a shareholder is really contrary to company law is a pure and exclusive question of company law and is therefore usually decided by a civil judge and civil court (usually a chamber for commercial matters) with special training in company law. For this reason, civil law also takes precedence over the question of whether a loan contrary to company law or the conduct of a shareholder in general leads to criminal liability for breach of trust, in accordance with the principle of the "unity of the legal system." This means that even if criminal proceedings for breach of trust have already been initiated, these proceedings must be suspended and the civil court must be allowed to clarify this question of company law.
This applies all the more so in this case because, according to a note made by the accused John on January 18, 2023, Antonia Fischer had already informed him on January 18, 2023, that she and Justus Hoffmann
"now intended to take civil action against the accused Fuellmich"
and have since filed precisely such a civil law/company law action against Dr. Fuellmich.
This is because if the civil court concludes that the loan is in order under company law, then criminal breach of trust is simply out of the question according to established supreme court case law and prevailing doctrine in legal literature. According to the principle of "unity of the legal system" ( ), something that is in order under civil law cannot lead to a criminal conviction for breach of trust (see only Schünemann, LPK, Untreue, margin note 71, in particular footnote 252).
Nevertheless, the outcome of the hearing of evidence conducted until the surprising legal opinion was issued even forced the defendant Schindler to acknowledge that the loan agreements for EUR 700,000 were entirely in order because
– contrary to the original hypotheses of the public prosecutor's office and the court, there was a very good reason for taking out the loan, namely the imminent seizure of the account by the corrupt and criminal Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security (see the NSU involvement of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution and the book by former Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania Minister Mathias Brodkorb on the Office for the Protection of the Constitution) and its helpers at the State Security Service, following several account closures and reports of suspected money laundering.State Security (see the involvement of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution in the NSU case and the book by former Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania Minister Mathias Brodkorb on the Office for the Protection of the Constitution) and its accomplices in the State Security Service, the judiciary, the LKAs, and the BKA,
– there were no information obligations whatsoever towards the completely inactive shareholders, who had in fact already withdrawn in August after the corporate dispute by setting up their competing event "Maskforce," and
– Dr. Fuellmich was always "willing" and "able" to repay the loan within days in the event of a liquidity crisis, but would have repaid it at the latest through the sale of his last German property,
– if Dr. Fuellmich had not been prevented from repaying the loan solely and exclusively by the fact that—of all people—the complainants had stolen the money intended for the loan repayment under the eyes and with the protection of the Göttingen public prosecutor's office and the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security.
b) The idea for the new allegations invented by the State Security Service/State Security on May 3, 2024, by the accused Schindler after he was contacted by the State Security Service/State SecurityState Security, came from the former senior public prosecutor and current lawyer Willanzheimer von Viviane Fischer on November 12, 2023, in response to a telephone call for help from the accused John on November 1, 2023.
At first glance, it seems puzzling where the accused Schindler got the idea for his new allegations against Dr. Fuellmich, announced on May 3, 2024. But here, too, the file itself is revealing:
As stated above, the first hearing of Dr. Fuellmich and his defense attorney Katja Wörmer before a judge took place on November 1, 2023. Until then, Dr. Fuellmich had been deliberately denied any legal hearing by the defendant John in gross violation of criminal procedure law , because otherwise everything would have been exposed before his abduction from Mexico and detention in pre-trial custody, which had been staged by the defendant John in collaboration with the accused LKA officer Lars Roggatz, who works for the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security. Now, however, on November 1, 2023, it was no longer possible to deny Dr. Fuellmich his right to a fair hearing, and he was heard by the judge at the Moog District Court who had blindly signed the arrest warrant application filed by the accused John on March 15, 2023. The judge did everything he could to prevent Dr. Fuellmich from speaking, initially
– first saying that he did not need to hear him because Dr. Fuellmich believed that all judges were remote-controlled puppets (which is false; Dr. Fuellmich is well aware that there are still exceptions of judges who are not corrupt) and
– then declared that he (Moog) was not in the least interested in what Dr. Fuellmich had to say (see above).
But he had obviously misjudged that Dr. Fuellmich's statements had been recorded in full by the court reporter. And these statements had revealed, as explained above, that all the allegations contained in the arrest warrant were false and that the arrest warrant had to be lifted immediately and Dr. Fuellmich released. However, the judge at the Moog District Court, who was thus guilty of perversion of justice and deprivation of liberty (and who, like the accused Schindler, was presumably acting on instructions from the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security), did not do so.
However, Dr. Fuellmich's statements and the resulting destruction of the arrest warrant apparently caused the defendant John to panic. He immediately called Viviane Fischer's former senior public prosecutor and current lawyer, Mr. Willanzheimer, and described the disaster to him. This, in turn, can be seen on page 87 of the main file, volume 4, and from Mr. Willanzheimer's reaction, which is evident there. This is confirmed by the introductory sentence of the telephone conversation with the defendant John that took place on November 1, 2023. It reads:
"Dear Mr. Prosecutor John, with reference to the telephone conversation held on November 1, 2023, my client informs you (...)"
This makes it clear that John had called Judge Moog at the local court on November 1, 2023, after the debacle concerning the arrest warrant at the local court. This is because the hearing of Dr. Fuellmich and the subsequent destruction of the arrest warrant took place early in the morning, i.e., before lawyers are usually available to clients and other (public) officials.
At the same time, the reaction of former senior public prosecutor Willanzheimer makes it clear that he still sees himself as a public prosecutor or, at any rate, as an assistant to the public prosecutor's office, in this case the accused John. As a lawyer who is neutral towards Dr. Fuellmich, but also as a prosecutor who works properly and therefore also investigates exonerating evidence, he should have pointed out to the accused John in the telephone call on November 1, 2023, and even more so in this letter, that it was now clear that the arrest warrant had to be lifted and Dr. Fuellmich released. This is because, according to Dr. Fuellmich's description in Appendix 3 to the criminal complaint and according to the statutes of the Corona Committee, it was almost certain that what had then emerged during the abruptly interrupted hearing of evidence on May 3, 2024, was true: Dr. Fuellmich's statements were true and the contrary allegations in the criminal complaint filed by the undercover agents of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution were false. Attorney Willanzheimer already knew the latter because he had Viviane Fischer's commentary on this criminal complaint from October 2022. After all, he had sent it to prosecutor John himself.
Instead, however, attorney Willanzheimer spent the period from November 1, 2023, to November 12, 2023, thinking about how he could best help the defendant John (and the state security/constitutional protection agency behind the proceedings) in perhaps still bringing the criminal proceedings, which had been continued since November 1, 2023, only by means of intentional deprivation of liberty, to a conclusion, but on a new factual level, i.e., with newly invented allegations and a conviction of Dr. Fuellmich. The result of these considerations can be found on page 87 at the bottom of the main file, volume 4, where attorney Willanzheimer writes:
"As a precautionary measure, it should be noted that when signing the contracts, Ms. Fischer was certain that Mr. Fuellmich would keep the loan liquid as agreed (he too still clearly refers to a loan, not a trust agreement or even a sham transaction agreement on the basis of which the loan would be null and void in order to conceal a trust agreement concluded at some point in the past, note by the signatory) in accordance with the agreement and was willing and able to repay it if necessary."
It was this idea of former senior public prosecutor Willanzheimer that inspired the accused Schindler, after being contacted by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security on May 3, 2024, to construct his complicated fantasy allegations. However, attorney Willanzheimer further refined this idea in a subsequent letter to the accused John dated December 5, 2023 (pages 162 and 162 R of the main file, volume 4). In this letter, he also refers to the chat messages subsequently used by the accused Schindler (although he incorrectly refers to them as email correspondence) as follows:
"Dear Mr. John,
With reference to our recent telephone conversation, I am sending you the aforementioned excerpt from the email correspondence (meaning chat correspondence, note by the undersigned) between Ms. Viviane Fischer and Dr. Reiner Fuellmich from July 7 to July 9, 2022, as attached in Appendix 1. It contains the following: (...)"
And then he quotes exactly what the defendant John later quotes in his legal notice of May 3, 2024.
It was therefore this idea of former senior public prosecutor Willanzheimer that inspired the defendant Schindler, after being contacted by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security on May 3, 2024, to construct his complicated fantasy allegations. However, Willanzheimer also speaks of a loan, not of a void loan or a secretly made trust agreement hidden behind it, as invented by the defendant Schindler on May 3, 2024. Even if, as suggested by attorney Willanzheimer in a vague manner and without details regarding when and how, an additional agreement to the loan agreements had been made to the effect that the money withdrawn under the loan agreement was to be kept in cash in another account, the whole thing would still have been a loan agreement which, because Dr. Fuellmich was always willing and able to repay it within a few days, would have been completely in order under company law. Apart from that, the two lawyers, Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich, would of course have included such an additional agreement directly in the loan agreement or agreements – what would have prevented them from doing so?
In short: The vague references here to the loan or loans being intended as "liquidity reserves" were indeed the spark that ignited the fabrications of the defendant Schindler on May 3, 2024. However, they have nothing to do with the complex construction and free invention announced by the defendant Schindler on May 3, 2024, namely that
a) loan agreements had been concluded, but
b) these were void due to a sham transaction agreement made at some point in time for reasons unknown, because
c) the loans had only served to conceal one or more trust agreements (for whatever reason),
d) according to which the donation money to be temporarily protected from state access was to be kept liquid in another account (and thus again exposed to state access).
Apart from that, Dr. Fuellmich and the defense (from whom this part of the file had initially been withheld, so that , attorney Wörmer, had to request it in a written submission dated November 24, 2023, before the defense even became aware of these inventions, see above), had to assume that the question of an alleged "liquidity reserve," however false it may have been, had long since been settled and played no role in the proceedings.
This is because the move by attorney Willanzheimer on November 12, 2023, has a history. And this proves that the defendant John, at least since April 19, 2023, did not (or no longer) attach any significance to the question of holding a liquidity reserve in another account belonging to Dr. Fuellmich and the witness Viviane Fischer – if he ever attached any significance to it at all. This is clear from the following:
In a letter dated March 21, 2023, attorney Willanzheimer first brought up the term "liquidity reserve" (which Viviane Fischer had never used before) to the defendant John during a mediation attempt in August 2022. He refers to a letter from the defendant John dated March 16, 2023 (page 148 of the main file, volume 2) and states – possibly misled by his client – that:
"He (meaning Dr. Fuellmich, note by the undersigned) therefore proposed to transfer part of the company's assets to private accounts, namely to his own and to that of my client, as a liquidity reserve in order to be able to meet the company's liabilities in the event of the emergency described. This was also done (see page 161 R of the file, note by the undersigned)."
This means that his client, Viviane Fischer, also proceeded in this manner, i.e., she allegedly deposited the money withdrawn under the loan agreement in her private account. However, he (Willanzheimer) maintains even at that time that, despite the "liquidity agreement" invented by him or his client, these were (valid) loan agreements and not trust agreements. He goes on to explain that these loan agreements (and not a trust agreement or a blank "liquidity reserve agreement") are transparently disclosed in the Corona Committee's books, which is indeed the case and is even confirmed by the analysis report:
"It should be noted that this was not a secret or concealed transaction and that it was transparently documented in the company's books. It was also carried out exclusively in the interests of the company."
This is all correct. Attorney Willanzheimer concludes his brief with the statement:
"Based on the loan agreement, the transparency of the transaction, and the fact that my client, , was able to repay the loan at any time if necessary, which it did, there is no apparent criminal relevance."
Nothing was concealed, least of all the loan agreement, and there was no second agreement to the effect that it should be invalid in order to conceal a trust agreement. Otherwise, attorney Willanzheimer would have stated this at this very point.
However, immediately afterwards, attorney Willanzheimer had to acknowledge that, contrary to his statement of March 21, 2023, his client did not have any liquidity reserves. According to her own chat statements, which were repeated by the defendant Schindler and were always the same, she had no income or assets of her own, either at the beginning of the loan relationship or in July 2022. She had therefore used the loan in its entirety for her living expenses, as the defendant Schindler himself states in his legal notice:
"(...) that the witness Viviane Fischer herself had also used the money—in accordance with the established content of the chat correspondence dated January 16, 2021—to bridge a financial gap."
Precisely because this was apparently clear to him when he asked Viviane Fischer for bank statements that would have shown that Viviane Fischer had kept the loan money in a private account, attorney Willanzheimer had to back down in a letter dated April 12, 2023 (page 179 of the main file, volume 2) and informed him:
"The account referred to by my client did not at any time contain the liquidity reserve of EUR 100,000."
This is a polite way of saying that she had in fact spent all the money, as she also admitted in her chat messages, which will be discussed later, and was therefore unable to repay it herself, also due to a lack of her own income and assets, and that in the meantime her account had even been seized by her unpaid creditors. Therefore, attorney Willanzheimer completely distances himself from the claim that there was an agreement that Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer had to maintain a liquidity reserve in their own private account, and—this is also important—he does not claim that he or his client were mistaken: Not both, but only Dr. Fuellmich had committed himself (which would have been really silly) to keep the money as a liquidity reserve. Instead, he completely reverses his position and drops the claim about the agreement to keep a separate liquidity reserve in his client's account, and now focuses solely on the fact that Viviane Fischer's husband was – allegedly – very wealthy and would have helped her out at any time:
"Nevertheless, as soon as a need arose, she would have been able to return the required sum to the company's assets immediately. I am enclosing a letter from her very wealthy husband, Jan Bohl, together with relevant evidence, in which Mr. Bohl confirms that he was prepared at any time to make the necessary amount available to his wife."
Although the defendant John also withholds this evidence, which he claims to have in his possession, from the defense, he does so but he immediately and without any investigation (which would have revealed that Viviane Fischer and her husband were accusing each other at the time that Jan Bohl no longer had any assets or income and was bankrupt, as they accuse each other in a video made available to the court) drops all investigations against Viviane Fischer on April 19, 2023 (page 187 of the main file, volume 2): Still mistaken (since he had not conducted any investigation contrary to the instructions of police investigator Spörhase and therefore did not know that Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer did indeed have sole power of representation), he states there:
"The loan agreement (note: not a trust agreement or agreement on a liquidity reserve, note by the signatory) may be questionable under company law in light of Section 4 of the articles of association of the Corona-Ausschuss UG foundation (referring to the alleged lack of sole power of management, note by the signatory). However, in view of the fact that the loan principal was repaid in full before the criminal complaint was filed and the husband of the accused has credibly assured that liquid funds were available at all times to repay the liquidity reserve, I cannot find sufficient suspicion of a criminal offense."
Apart from the fact that Viviane Fischer did not repay the loan before the criminal complaint was filed on September 2, 2022, as the defendant John claims, but only on October 21, 2022, and apart from the fact that Viviane Fischer's husband, according to the video dispute between Viviane Fischer and Jan Bohl, which has been referred to and quoted several times, did not have any funds at his disposal, one thing was clear:
The question of whether Viviane Fischer or Dr. Fuellmich had to keep the money in their private accounts it no longer mattered since April 19, 2023, but only whether the money could be repaid by Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich at any time in the event of a liquidity requirement (which, contrary to Viviane Fischer's deliberately false claims, never arose). Whether this was really the case with Viviane Fischer is to be denied. But this was the case with Dr. Fuellmich, as has revealed in the further, albeit laboriously self-induced partial examination of evidence, despite conditionally admitted questions:
Dr. Fuellmich could have obtained the required amount within a few days from, for example, attorney Tobias Weissenborn, Dr. Mike Yeadon, or his best friend Joseph Baron, simply because of the very high value of his completely unencumbered last German property in Göttingen and the high value of his also completely unencumbered ranch in Northern California.
5. The abrupt termination of the hearing of evidence on May 3, 2024, and the equally abrupt refusal to hear the witnesses requested by the defense to refute the new factual and legal situation announced on May 3, 2024, violates Dr. Fuellmich's right to a fair hearing, all the more so as an affidavit submitted by Dr. Fuellmich through his attorney, Mr. Weissenborn, already made it necessary during the preliminary investigation, at the latest as of November 12, 2023, to clarify the following
a) The proceedings should have been suspended in accordance with the Code of Criminal Procedure so that the defense could properly prepare for the changed factual situation communicated on May 3, 2024.
In accordance with the Code of Criminal Procedure, but also in accordance with common sense, the defendant Schindler should have given Dr. Fuellmich and the defense on May 3, 2024, the opportunity to prepare sufficiently for the changed situation (no longer "company law") presented by the defendant Schindler. on May 3, 2024, the defendant Schindler should have given Dr. Fuellmich and the defense sufficient opportunity to prepare for the changed circumstances (no longer a "company loan" but a "breach of a confidential agreement on a fiduciary relationship"). After all, what is the point of announcing a legal notice if not to draw the attention of a party to the proceedings, in this case the defense, to something it had not seen before? Accordingly, the defense should also have been given the opportunity to name the witnesses it had designated to refute the defendant Schindler's fabrication and to hear them.
This follows, inter alia, from Section 265 (2) No. 3 in conjunction with (4) StPO. According to this, it is first necessary for the court to give notice of a change in the facts of the case so that the defendant has sufficient time to prepare and an opportunity to defend himself against the now changed facts. The defendant Schindler correctly gave this notice on May 3, 2024, as he wanted to give the defense the opportunity to recognize the changed facts. However, this also means that after providing his legal information (in reality, it was information about new facts), the defendant Schindler should have given the defense the opportunity to prepare for the changed facts from his point of view (see above: no longer a loan under company law, but a breach of a secret trust agreement).
In fact, defense attorneys Katja Wörmer and Dr. Miseré immediately filed a motion to stay proceedings upon receiving the notification dated May 3, 2024, so that could adequately prepare their defense in light of the new circumstances and—as was then the case—could call witnesses to refute these new allegations. Contrary to paragraph 4, and in clear violation of Dr. Fuellmich's right to a fair hearing, the defendant rejected these motions. However, Section 265(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure specifically provides that a motion for suspension shall be granted if, as a result of the changed circumstances (in this case due to the legal notice), it is appropriate for the defense to prepare adequately.
There can be no doubt that the requested suspension was appropriate for the defense to prepare adequately due to the change in circumstances brought about by the court. This is because the entire trial had been put on a completely new footing on May 3, 2024. This was all the more so because the witnesses, attorney Willanzheimer and Viviane Fischer, who were named somewhat later due to the unlawful refusal to suspend the proceedings, were to be heard in order to refute the new allegations (which were actually to be proven by the public prosecutor's office, but the defendant Schindler was not interested in this distribution of the burden of proof). The rejection of these motions to introduce evidence shows once again that the defendant Schindler was determined, by hook or by crook and even by perverting the course of justice, to secure a quick conviction of Dr. Fuellmich, who he knew to be completely innocent since at least November 1, 2023.
b) Clarification of the new, clearly disputed facts was urgently needed because the defendant John had not conducted any investigations, even though this had been required since November 12, 2023.
By November 12, 2023, at the latest, the new facts communicated to the accused John by attorney Willanzheimer on that day should have been clarified – if they had been relevant, as was suddenly claimed on May 3, 2024. However, it is well known that the accused John did not conduct any investigations whatsoever and did not even follow the agreement recorded by police investigator Spörhase to interview the complainants and Viviane Fischer as witnesses. Upon receipt of the letter from attorney Willanzheimer, who was responding (see above) to the defendant John's telephone call for help on November 1, 2023, regarding the arrest warrant that had collapsed on the morning of November 1, 2023, it was now absolutely necessary to finally investigate, namely: to determine who is telling the truth, Viviane Fischer, with the statement conveyed by attorney Willanzheimer that she had
– "assumed with certainty" that Dr. Fuellmich would keep the loan proceeds in cash in a private account as agreed (based on what agreement?),
– or Dr. Fuellmich, who categorically denies this and has always denied it, as – ironically – lawyer Willanzheimer himself states in his letter dated November 12, 2023.
This is because attorney Willanzheimer did not attach to his claim, which he allegedly received from Viviane Fischer, regarding an alleged liquidity reserve to be maintained with the loan proceeds, a corresponding statement or even an affidavit from his client. Instead, he attached an affidavit from Dr. Fuellmich to this letter. And in this affidavit dated June 22, 2023, Dr. Fuellmich clearly states to the Göttingen Regional Court in civil summary proceedings brought by Viviane Fischer against Dr. Fuellmich (in which Viviane Fischer sought to prohibit Dr. Fuellmich from responding to her allegations made public on September 2, 2022) that there were no agreements other than the loan agreements, in particular no trust agreements.
Specifically, Dr. Fuellmich states in the affidavit attached by attorney Willanzheimer to his letter of November 12, 2023, to the defendant John, in response to Viviane Fischer's claim in her summary proceedings that there had been a trust agreement (page 89, main file volume 4):
"Ms. Fischer's assertion that a fiduciary relationship or a fiduciary agreement was concluded or entered into here is simply false. In legal terms, these are loans, not assets transferred in trust that are subject to special care. Both Ms. Fischer and I received loans from the liquid assets of the Corona Committee (...) No trust agreements were concluded for either Ms. Fischer or me (...)"
Why attorney Willanzheimer attaches a statement by Dr. Fuellmich to his letter of November 12, 2023, regarding an alleged agreement on a liquidity reserve, which is also couched in an affidavit for a court with a special guarantee of truthfulness that states exactly the opposite of Viviane Fischer's alleged statement, namely that there were only simple loan agreements, is puzzling: Perhaps he did so because he had already realized in March 2023 that Viviane Fischer had obviously misinformed him regarding her statement, which he (lawyer Willanzheimer) had forwarded to the defendant John at the time, that Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer had agreed to keep the loan proceeds as a "liquidity reserve" in their private accounts. In April 2023, he had to drop this claim (see above) because Viviane Fischer did not have any cash in her own account at the time. Perhaps he wanted to take precautions here and – in case this new claim that only Dr. Fuellmich had undertaken to keep the loan proceeds in cash in his own account was also false (which is what the affidavit suggests) – did not want to expose himself to accusations of trial fraud.
In any case, the defendant John had to clarify this matter, especially since the statement submitted by Dr. Fuellmich through attorney Willanzheimer was not merely a simple statement, but an affidavit. And anyone who makes a false affidavit is liable to prosecution under Section 156 of the German Criminal Code (StGB). The fact that the defendant John, despite the obvious possibility that either the statement communicated by Willanzheimer on behalf of his client or the affidavit of Dr. Fuellmich was false because it contradicted the statement communicated by attorney Willanzheimer on behalf of Viviane Fischer, did nothing to clarify the matter who is telling the truth here is particularly strange because the accused John knows very well that false affidavits are punishable under Section 156 of the German Criminal Code (StGB).
This is because, less than a month before receiving the letter from attorney Willanzheimer dated November 12, 2023, containing Dr. Fuellmich's affidavit, he immediately and eagerly seized the opportunity to initiate further proceedings against Dr. Fuellmich on the basis of a false affidavit. He had been made aware by the complainant, Justus Hoffmann, of another affidavit by Dr. Fuellmich (page 22, main file volume 2), which he had submitted in the same summary proceedings. In that affidavit, Dr. Fuellmich had assured the Göttingen Regional Court that, contrary to Viviane Fischer's claims, the money intended for the repayment of the loan was still available (namely with those who had stolen it, in the account of the blackmailer and fraudster Marcel Templin). And since the defendant John immediately recognized the opportunity to bring further criminal proceedings against Dr. Fuellmich, he ordered on October 11, 2023, as evidenced by page 181, main file volume 3, that a new file number be entered immediately for false affidavit and that the matter be referred back to him. However, he then naturally realized that
– Dr. Fuellmich's statement in the affidavit was not only correct because the money was indeed still available, only that it was in the account of the blackmailer and fraudster Marcel Templin, but
– on top of that, the theft of the money had taken place under his (the accused John's) eyes and protection, meaning that he had made himself liable to prosecution,
he did not pursue the matter further.
This means that the defendant John is well aware that false affidavits are punishable by criminal proceedings for making false affidavits. The fact that he only did so with regard to the first affidavit, which Justus Hoffmann had pointed out to him, and then regarding the affidavit of Dr. Fuellmich from the letter of attorney Willanzheimer dated November 12, 2023, shows that he knew that both affidavits , including the one submitted by attorney Willanzheimer in his letter dated November 12, 2023, were true.
Against this background, the defendant Schindler should not have simply presented the invention (loan agreement, sham contract, trust agreement, liquidity reserve) based on the letter from attorney Willanzheimer dated November 12, 2023, together with Dr. Fuellmich's affidavit, as already established. Instead, he should have finally clarified what the defendant John had delayed or failed to do since November 12, 2023, now that he (the defendant Schindler) considered the claim of a liquidity reserve to be relevant and had concocted something new out of it, namely by taking evidence.
c) The defense did not have to expect that the references from March 2023 to an allegedly agreed liquidity reserve would suddenly play a role in the proceedings after all.
Attorney Willanzheimer had already claimed on March 21, 2023, that Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer had agreed to keep the loan proceeds in liquid form in a private account, and that Viviane Fischer had done so. When he then discovered that Viviane Fischer had not done so, he was forced to backtrack in a letter dated April 12, 2023, and concede to the defendant John that his client had not kept a corresponding liquidity reserve in her account. However, Willanzheimer explained that Viviane Fischer's husband, Jan Bohl, was very wealthy and could have helped her out at any time with his own liquidity. This was incorrect, but the defendant Schindler did not notice this because he did not conduct any investigations. However, he accepted this claim at face value and, on April 19, 2023, dropped all investigations against Viviane Fischer for breach of trust. This made it clear to everyone involved in the trial, including, of course, the defense, that the question of whether the money from the private loans had to be kept in a different account than the donation account, namely in a private account, was irrelevant for criminal law purposes. For if the accused John discontinued his investigation into Viviane Fischer for breach of trust because it was sufficient for him that Viviane Fischer could draw on the alleged liquidity of her husband Jan Bohl if necessary, then the same had to apply to Dr. Fuellmich, who (unlike Viviane Fischer) could actually obtain the necessary liquidity from his friends at any time – as the questioning of witnesses Tobias Weissenborn and Joseph Baron and Dr. Fuellmich's own statements have shown – could have obtained the necessary liquidity from his friends at any time, but in any case would have been able to repay the loan without any problems from his own assets by selling the Göttingen property, if this money had not been stolen from him under the eyes and with the protection of the accused John.
d) Contrary to the invention of the defendant Schindler, it was clear from the statement of the witness, attorney Weissenborn, which he himself quoted, but also from the witness Andrea Becherer and from the statements of Viviane Fischer in court, which the defendant Schindler concealed at , that there were only purely private loans and nothing else.
One of the defendant Schindler's main arguments for the claim that – somehow, with whatever content and whenever – the sham business agreements, trust agreements, and liquidity reserve agreements between Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer, which he first asserted on May 3, 2024, had been concluded, is Viviane Fischer's alleged surprise when she – allegedly – first learned in July 2022 (i.e., one to one and a half years after the private loan agreements were concluded) that a large part of Dr. Fuellmich's money had been invested in his Göttingen property.
aa) In this argument, however, he ignored the statement by lawyer Weissenborn, which he himself strangely quoted in his "legal notice," proving that Viviane Fischer knew from the outset that Dr. Fuellmich had invested the private loan privately, in accordance with the private loan agreements, namely to a large extent in his private real estate, thereby increasing its value.
It should be noted that According to page 1 below and page 2 above of the legal notice dated May 3, 2024, the exchange between Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich, which allegedly proves Viviane Fischer's surprise that Dr. Fuellmich did not keep the money he withdrew in another account in liquid form, was at the center of the defendant Schindler's apparent considerations. According to the defendant Schindler, this in turn clearly proves that in reality, no loan agreements were concluded in November 2020, January 2021, and May 2021, but rather trust agreements for liquidity reserves, and that the loan agreements were only concluded for appearance's sake to conceal the trust agreements on liquidity reserves. Admittedly, this makes no sense at first glance. If Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer had not actually wanted to conclude loan agreements in order to "make part of the donation money disappear" and thus withdraw them from the authorities' access – but at the same time (namely via the loan agreement) also stipulate repayment obligations, then they would simply have concluded what they really wanted according to the invention of the defendant Schindler, namely trust agreements for holding a liquidity reserve. What would have prevented them, both of whom were lawyers, from doing so? But even stranger than this obvious contradiction is the following: Right at the beginning of his argument, the defendant Schindler writes:
"Although the witness Weissenborn stated that the defendant had mentioned to him in November 2020 that he wanted to park the money in his real estate in relation to the first 200,000. He also said that during a telephone conversation with the witness Viviane Fischer, when he asked her where the amount to be paid to her should be transferred to, , he asked her out of interest whether she also parked money in real estate, to which she replied in the negative and said something else, which he could no longer remember. This account would suggest that the witness Viviane Fischer was aware that the defendant intended to park the money in his property, as he himself writes. Furthermore, it could also suggest that the witness Viviane Fischer herself had used the money to bridge a financial gap, in accordance with the established content of the chat correspondence dated January 16, 2021."
In the chat referred to by the defendant Schindler, Viviane Fischer had stated that she had no income and, regarding the intended loan, had asked
"How am I ever going to be able to pay that back?"
bb) Viviane Fischer knew from the outset that Dr. Fuellmich – and, of course, she herself – would use the loan proceeds privately to make her "disappear." She knew that Dr. Fuellmich had considerable real estate assets as a "store of value" for repaying the loans. Conversely, Dr. Fuellmich also assumed that Viviane Fischer had a corresponding "store of value" in the form of real estate in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, as she had informed Dr. Fuellmich. Even on October 5, 2022, at a shareholders' meeting staged by the complainants, Viviane Fischer stated, according to page 9, middle, main file volume 2, in response to the accusation that only Dr. Fuellmich had a "store of value" for the loans:
"Yes, real estate."
However, Dr. Fuellmich had learned in the meantime that the real estate in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania belonged solely to her husband, who had a prenuptial agreement protecting him against claims by Viviane Fischer, and responded to Viviane Fischer's false assertion by stating:
"No, prenuptial agreement."
Presumably, Viviane Fischer had nevertheless repeated this false claim at this point out of fear of the unpredictable behavior of the complainants.
That Viviane Fischer knew from the beginning until the end in July 2022 that not only she, but also Dr. Fuellmich would make a large part of the loan proceeds "disappear" privately, namely through investments in this "store of value" (Göttingen property), is also confirmed by the testimony of witness Andrea Becherer, which was laboriously obtained by the defense team of the " " (Göttingen Property) through a self-charging procedure. Andrea Becherer stated that Viviane Fischer (as Viviane Fischer herself had admitted in court) had visited the Dr. Fuellmich family several times and had seen the ongoing extensive work in the garden. Yes, Viviane Fischer had even talked to her – Andrea Becherer – about it, because she – Andrea Becherer – had also been present during these visits.
Later, in early June 2022, while Dr. Fuellmich was still on the Crimes Against Humanity Tour through nine cities in the US, Viviane Fischer stayed overnight at Andrea Becherer's place with her partner at the time, based on an agreement with Dr. Fuellmich that she could pick up the gold stored there. On this occasion, Viviane Fischer spoke to Andrea Becherer about this again. According to Andrea Becherer, it was at this occasion, late in the evening, apparently under the impression of the progress she had noticed in the extensive gardening work, that Viviane Fischer expressly asked Andrea Becherer whether it was correct that Dr. Fuellmich had used the Corona Committee's loan for this work.
She could only have asked this question (as if to reassure herself) because she remembered from the above-mentioned telephone conversation with attorney Weissenborn in January 2021 that Dr. Fuellmich wanted to "park" the loan in his property. However, she also knew that Dr. Fuellmich had sufficient funds of his own that he could have invested, as she explains on page 170 R, volume 4 of the file:
"Why shouldn't a homeowner renovate his garden to a reasonable extent? Reiner made a very liquid impression."
However, since the defendant Schindler did not know at the time of his legal notice on May 3, 2024, that the witness Andrea Becherer would confirm exactly what is quoted above shortly thereafter, namely that Viviane Fischer naturally knew from her telephone conversation with attorney Weissenborn that Dr. Fuellmich would park the money in his property and then wanted to have this confirmed after Andrea Becherer had personally inspected the garden work, the defendant Schindler simply dismissed the massive doubts that already existed based on the statement by attorney Weissenborn that Viviane Fischer did not know that Dr. Fuellmich would park the loan in his property. He then proceeds to what will soon become apparent as the very flimsy argument from the chat correspondence dating from July 2022 and continues:
"However, the chamber's assessment based on the content of the chat between the witness Viviane Fischer and the defendant in July 2022 is that the witness Viviane Fischer, as she herself explained, assumed that the defendant would keep the 700,000 as a liquidity reserve, which the defendant was also aware of."
However, this "assessment" also has no basis in fact. It completely ignores the fact that Viviane Fischer, when asked specifically by the defendant Schindler whether she had ever spoken to Dr. Fuellmich about the "liquidity reserve" she had mentioned in passing during the interrogation about the loans, had denied this. And it ignores the fact that Viviane Fischer had also told Judge Hoock that she would have considered transferring the money to another account "counterproductive," which prompted Hoock to ask in astonishment whether that would not be consistent with keeping the money in liquid form.
Specifically, both the defense and trial observer Nicole Fischer recorded the following from the questioning of witness Viviane Fischer, because they knew since December 19, 2024, that the defendant Schindler would only record statements incriminating Dr. Fuellmich:
"The presiding judge asks whether they had discussed again what should happen with it (the loan proceeds, note by the undersigned), whether it should be a liquidity or fixed-term deposit reserve. Viviane Fischer says no."
A little later, Viviane Fischer explained that transferring the money from the donation account to a private account would have been "counterproductive." Judge Hoock pointed out the contradiction between this statement and Viviane Fischer's vague explanation in a subordinate clause that she had assumed that Dr. Fuellmich had deposited the money in a custody account. Trial observer Nicole Fischer recorded this as follows:
"Hoock introduces his next question. He explains that Viviane Fischer thought Fuellmich would invest the money. On the other hand, she, Viviane Fischer, said that the money could not simply be put into another account. He asks: How does that fit together?"
Even after this discussion, which was conducted somewhat in passing, the defense had to assume that a "liquidity reserve" in another account could not be relevant.
e) Neither the chat correspondence between Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich from July 2022 referred to by the defendant Schindler nor the emails from early November 2020 indicate in any way that, instead of the private loan agreements that were concluded, there was a sham transaction agreement for the purpose of concealing trust agreements that were actually concluded, on the basis of which the loan proceeds were to be held as a "liquidity reserve" in a private account.
aa) At the beginning or in the middle of November, in any case before the conclusion of the purely private loan agreements, Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich had still considered whether part of the loan proceeds should be transferred to a lawyer's escrow account held by Dr. Fuellmich at a Californian bank (where Dr. Fuellmich maintained a so-called IOLTA account for his US and other clients, i.e., an account where his clients would receive interest on the money deposited there: IOLTA = Interest On Lawyers' Trust Account), and part to a Liechtenstein account held by Viviane Fischer. However, Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich immediately rejected this plan, as Viviane Fischer did not want to transfer donation money abroad after all, and the very simple private loan agreements were concluded, as they are available in court and are well known. In this regard, it should be recalled once again that Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich alone (later joined by the highly competent manager Corvin Rabenstein, hired by Dr. Fuellmich for the Corona Committee) managed everything that was necessary to initiate and continue the work of the Corona Committee and that had to be done in full swing. This is because the immediate and almost unbelievable worldwide success of the Corona Committee had led to a huge response from all over the world, which was almost impossible to cope with until, after a few days, everything ended up at Dr. Fuellmich's law firm, which from then on handled the email and letter inquiries to the Corona Committee just as professionally as the phone calls. At the same time, it became apparent that professional accounting, proper tax advice, etc. were required, so Dr. Fuellmich hired the highly competent Jens Kuhn.
In any case, Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich had the idea of transferring part of the loan money abroad, but then dropped it. However, if they had wanted to do so, they could have easily included this in the loan agreement, as they were both lawyers, by stating, for example: An amount of X is to be transferred to Dr. Fuellmich's US escrow account and kept there in liquid form; an amount of X is to be transferred to Viviane Fischer's Liechtenstein account and kept there in liquid form.
However, they did not do so, because the money was not supposed to be transferred to another account where it could be traced and then seized. Instead, the money was supposed to "disappear," but be made available again to the Corona- Committee via the loan repayment claim. In addition, Viviane Fischer actually needed the loan proceeds for her livelihood (see above) due to her lack of income and assets. And since both Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich assumed that the other had a "store of value" in the form of real estate that would secure the repayment of the loan, neither Viviane Fischer nor Dr. Fuellmich saw any problem with the private use of the private loans. Even in the event of an audit or tax inspection, no problems were to be expected, since no donations had been secretly and opaquely withdrawn and thus disappeared, but rather completely normal, proper loan agreements with a repayment claim existed, including in the Corona Committee's accounts.
bb) The chat correspondence between Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich referred to by the defendant Schindler in relation to his invention does not contain the slightest indication that loan agreements were concluded, even if only for appearance's sake, in order to conceal agreed trust agreements for the purpose of holding "liquidity reserves." As a precautionary measure, reference is made to the chat correspondence between Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich from July 6 to July 10, 2022, referred to by the defendant Schindler at the beginning of his "legal notice." This is because there is absolutely no reference whatsoever to the construction invented by the defendant Schindler: There, too, there is only ever talk of loan agreements; nowhere do the words "sham transaction," "trust agreement," or "liquidity reserve" appear. However, it would have been more than obvious that Viviane Fischer would have pointed out this construction to Dr. Fuellmich if it had existed. This chat correspondence, which was sent to the defendant John by attorney Willanzheimer on December 5, 2023, had been communicated by Viviane Fischer to Dr. Fuellmich on her (Viviane Fischer's) supposedly secure "Threema" messenger service. So what would have prevented Viviane Fischer from confronting Dr. Fuellmich with the construction invented by the defendant Schindler, if such a construction had ever existed?
In any case, the defendant Schindler does not even allow himself to be dissuaded by the statement he himself quoted from the witness, attorney Weissenborn, who had expressly stated that Viviane Fischer had known since January 2021 that Dr. Fuellmich would invest the loan proceeds, or at least a large portion thereof, in his real estate. If she had been surprised by this at the time or had disagreed with it (even though she herself had used her loans privately), then common sense dictates that she would have immediately sounded the alarm and confronted Dr. Fuellmich. The fact that she did not do so proves only one thing, namely that she was not surprised but agreed with it, precisely because both (Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich) had concluded private loan agreements for this very reason, namely that the money (the repayment of which was secured by the "store of value" that existed from both their points of view) should disappear without a trace and untouchable by the authorities.
As a precautionary measure, but nevertheless in detail regarding the chats referred to by the accused Schindler from July 6 to July 10, 2022:
On July 6, 2023, at 2:31 p.m., Viviane Fischer sent the following text message to Dr. Fuellmich:
"Reiner, I just received a bank statement from the new company. We only received €37,000 in donations in July, so we can no longer cover the legal fees for your work. We simply won't be able to process the emails. (...) We need more money now for the important projects."
This therefore proves nothing regarding the interpretation made by the defendant Schindler. However, it does prove, as the court also recognized, that Viviane Fischer was of course well aware that Dr. Fuellmich's law firm had taken over the Corona exclusion communication and was being paid accordingly for the enormous effort involved. Viviane Fischer had lied about this. She even knew the exact amount of the monthly payments, including travel expenses and accommodation allowances for Dr. Fuellmich, namely: 25,000 euros net. This is again confirmed by her chat message of July 8, 2023, at 1:46 p.m. on page 15 of self-reading folder 3, where she asks Dr. Fuellmich exactly that:
"But of the 25,000 euros per month (= per month, note by the signatory) you receive, there must be something left over (...)"
Contrary to her statements in public and also in court, she knew this because she
– she had signed the preliminary annual financial statement for 2020, where these payments are listed,
– and secondly because she had managed the Corona Committee's account on a fiduciary basis from November or December 2021 to May 2022,
– and then, in May 2022, she had set up her own account for the new company, which she was able to view in detail.
She was therefore able to see exactly how these amounts were debited each month, as well as payments she herself had made for filming and streaming the programs, for her IT guy in Poland , etc., amounting to tens of thousands of euros per month.
Still on July 7, 2022, at 2:02 p.m., Viviane Fischer writes on page 12 at the bottom of the self-reading folder:
"We only have 4,000 euros left in the old committee account, and about 40,000 euros in the new one, which we can't access yet. Of that, 25,000 euros belongs to the pathology conference. Fortunately, that's all we have to pay. We need money at short notice for the Israel committee and radio. It's not much, but it adds up. Can you deposit something? I think 50,000 euros will be enough for now."
As has now been established (as a precaution, additional requests for evidence have also been submitted), the Pathology Conference to which Viviane Fischer refers only received the money owed to it under the agreement concluded by Viviane Fischer (without the involvement of Dr. Fuellmich) with those responsible for the Pathology Conference around a year after this chat. Why Viviane Fischer did not pay it from the money that was available at the time, amounting to at least 44,000 euros in the old and new donation accounts, or from the gold that could be liquidated at any time, remains unclear. This is because she alone, Viviane Fischer, had control over the donation account after the termination of accountant Jens Kuhn in violation of company law.
The purchase of a radio station she mentioned in this chat message, as well as Viviane Fischer's "creative impulse" to establish a committee branch in Israel, did not come to fruition. Both turned out to be two of the many ideas Viviane Fischer floated to attract attention.
Viviane Fischer revealed what she really wanted the money for, if not for the Corona Committee, in a chat message dated July 7, 2022, at 7:29 p.m.:
"We now need €60,000 in advance financing for printing. Can you deposit that?"
So it was not a liquidity crisis at the Corona Committee at all. Rather, Viviane Fischer herself was in a liquidity crisis because she had neither her own income nor her own assets. But she needed money for her book "Homo Amicus."
Since Viviane Fischer always acts on impulse without thinking about the consequences of her actions or her own words, she had once again – presumably out of anger and disappointment that Dr. Fuellmich wanted to continue the Corona Committee with her , but only via Zoom from the US – started a fight out of the blue.
In any case, it was not the Corona Committee that urgently needed money, namely 50,000 or 60,000 euros, but she herself, who needed 60,000 euros to print her book. She had promised buyers that the book would be delivered in August 2022. However, books that are not printed cannot be delivered. Viviane Fischer was now faced with the problem of having to use the money she had received from pre-sales of the book on her 2020 News account twice, namely once for printing the books due for delivery in August 2022, as she writes in the chat message just quoted. But she also needed the money to repay her loan. She wrote this in a chat message on July 9, 2022, at 9:32 a.m., after reminding Dr. Fuellmich about his loan a fraction of a second earlier (obviously again without thinking):
"The money must be returned as soon as possible (...)",
and at the same moment she realized that this must also apply to her loan:
"Mine too. But I hope that will come through our book (...)"
It was not "our" book, but a book by Viviane Fischer. But this wording means that she hoped that by selling her book she would be able to repay her loan.
Again, at the same moment, she must have realized that this prospect was at least doubtful. It was impossible to predict whether there would be enough money left over after using the proceeds from the pre-sales to print her books, which were due to be delivered in August 2022, to repay the loan. In fact, because of the dispute over the loan repayment that had been triggered by this chat with Dr. Fuellmich, she was under so much pressure to repay her own loan as quickly as possible that, starting in August 2022, she used the proceeds from the book pre-sales not to print the books, but to repay the loan, in other words, she misappropriated or embezzled the money. The books were not printed and delivered until eight months later. There are also requests for evidence on this, but, like all other requests by the defense, they were rejected by the defendant Schindler.
There was never a liquidity crisis for the Corona Committee, as Viviane Fischer claimed. Firstly, according to the evaluation carried out by police investigator Spörhase on page 77 at the bottom and 77 R at the bottom, main file volume 2, the donation account still had a positive balance of more than €43,000 as of January 30, 2023. This was despite the fact that Viviane Fischer (mind you, in addition to the loan she had openly taken out) had secretly diverted more than €95,000 to her 2020 News account (page 77 below, main file volume 2). And secondly, the gold was available for liquidation at any time in the event of a liquidity crisis, and since June 2022 even without any potential tax disadvantages for the increase in value of the gold, as Dr. Fuellmich had informed Viviane Fischer in a chat message dated July 7, 2022, at 2:11 p.m., page 13, self-reading folder 3:
"However, gold can now be sold without us having to pay taxes, as Jens explained a few weeks ago."
The defendant Schindler believes that the fact that Dr. Fuellmich patiently explained to Viviane Fischer in the chat that he was in the process of selling the Göttingen property (as later described in detail in the email dated August 26, 2022) and that he intended to use this "store of value" – repay the loan as planned, that Viviane Fischer knew nothing about the investment in the property. He continues to fantasize on page 2 of his "legal notice":
"Accordingly, the defendant himself saw reason to explain to the witness Fischer that the money had not been left in the accounts, and the witness was surprised when she learned of this. Furthermore, the defendant did not argue that this had been discussed with the witness, but explained his actions to her. The Chamber concludes from this that the witness Viviane Fischer trusted until July 7, 2022, that the defendant would keep the 700,000 in cash in bank accounts and that nothing else had been discussed."
In fact, it is exactly the opposite (inverse, as is the tactic of the perpetrators acting here): These were purely private loans, which were also used privately by both (Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich), but whose repayment was secured by the respective "store of value." And nothing other than these purely private loans had been discussed and agreed upon. If something different had been agreed, it would simply have been recorded in writing (see above).
As has already been proven and demonstrated several times in court, Viviane Fischer ignores everything that is unpleasant to her and sometimes does not even respond to repeated attempts to address her. Furthermore, as established by the statements of attorney Weissenborn, which were quoted by the defendant Schindler himself, and subsequently by the statements of Andrea Becherer, Viviane Fischer knew since the loan was paid out to her in January 2021 that Dr. Fuellmich would park or invest his money in the property. And Viviane Fischer, after personally inspecting the corresponding visible garden work, which she had also noticed, asked Andrea Becherer whether the money had in fact been invested in the property (as Tobias Weissenborn had explained to her). She was therefore not surprised, but remained completely calm.
Rather, if Viviane Fischer had really been surprised (and had not merely reacted angrily because it was not the Corona Committee but she herself who needed money to print her book due for delivery in August 2022 and was therefore under pressure), then she would have explained at least something like this at that very moment:
Reiner, that's not how it works. May I remind you that we agreed not to spend the money because we entered into a sham contract agreement stipulating that the loan agreements were null and void in order to conceal the fact that you and I had entered into a trust agreement under which the money withdrawn was to be kept in cash in another account belonging to us.
Mind you, in this chat transcript, she should not only have indignantly pointed out to Dr. Fuellmich the construction invented by the accused Schindler in the manner just described, but she should also have pointed out (see the letter from attorney Willanzheimer dated March 21, 2023) that both she and Dr. Fuellmich had committed themselves to maintaining a liquidity reserve—if the letter from attorney Willanzheimer had not also been based (see above) on a fabrication by Viviane Fischer. For what reason would Dr. Fuellmich have unilaterally committed himself to Viviane Fischer to transfer only the money he had withdrawn to another account and keep it there in liquid form, while allowing her to spend the money as she pleased?
Apart from that, Dr. Fuellmich wrote on August 15, 2022, at 8:47 p.m., by now completely annoyed by Viviane Fischer's constant new requests to finally get her (not the Corona Committee) money for printing her book (not for running the Corona Committee) by either borrowing money from his friend and economic expert Björn Pirrwitz or by working with her IT guy Mick from Poland to get commissions:
"What's this? We have an agreement. Sales are going as I described. The money will be returned, and that was never in doubt at . Why do you keep bringing up the same thing? Why should Björn lend me money or do something through Mick? Why don't you just borrow money for whatever purpose? This terrier-like behavior isn't helping, it's just annoying."
Following the logic of the accused Schindler, this chat message, following on from the information she had already given Tobias Weissenborn in January 2021 about the investment of the money in the Göttingen property and following on from the fact that she herself had even seen and, upon inquiry with the witness Andrea Becherer, had once again confirmed that the money had been invested in the property, clearly shows that Viviane Fischer had indeed agreed to park the money in the property and to repay the loan from the sale of the properties. What else could the reference to
"We have an agreement, the sale is proceeding as I have described, the money will be returned, and that was never in doubt"
mean other than that Viviane Fischer and Dr. Fuellmich had agreed (at least implicitly) that the money parked in the property would be repaid from the sale of the property and, accordingly, Viviane Fischer's loan would be repaid from the sale or encumbrance of the property in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania?
In short: Despite the efforts of the accused Schindler to strangle the rules of interpretation for declarations of intent and contracts in Sections 133 and 157 of the German Civil Code (BGB), everything indicates that only private loan agreements between Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer were concluded in a manner that is legally sound under company law, and nothing else.
IV. On the lack of intent, even according to the findings of the accused Schindler, and on the justification of the withdrawal of money for temporary protection against arbitrary state seizure of accounts
1. For a conviction for breach of trust pursuant to Section 266 of the German Criminal Code (StGB), it is not sufficient for the public prosecutor's office to prove beyond reasonable doubt that there has been a breach of a duty to manage assets. It must also prove that the defendant committed this breach of duty intentionally; a negligent breach of duty is not sufficient.
According to the findings of the accused Schindler, there is a complete lack of intent in this case. In this respect, after the accusation of loans contrary to company law collapsed on May 3, 2024, it is assumed for the purposes of argumentation that Dr. Fuellmich's conduct in the present case can be objectively qualified as a violation of the financial interests of others.
Then there is no intent, because Dr. Fuellmich, as the court itself found, albeit only after evidence was taken by means of a self-loading procedure, was at all times willing and able to repay the money taken. The subjective element of § 266 StGB requires double intent. First, the intent must be to commit a breach of duty, i.e., to violate a duty to manage assets. This is not the case, as just explained, because there was no other option than the one chosen to "cleanly" achieve the necessary protection of parts of the donated assets. However, and this is crucial, the intent must also extend to causing a disadvantage (see Schönke-Schröder/Perron, Strafrechtskommentar, Section 266 marginal number 49, p. 2764). However, anyone who is consistently willing and able to repay the money withdrawn at any time cannot have the intent to cause damage, i.e., a disadvantage, to the Corona Committee by withdrawing the money for the purpose of protecting it. Once again: Withdrawing the money and using it privately to make it "disappear" and protect it from access by the clients of the accused Schindler and John was the only way to protect part of the donations and remain "clean" under company law. If Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer had done nothing to protect the donations from the imminent arbitrary seizure by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security, they would have been guilty of breach of trust by omission (see Schönke-Schröder/Perron, § 266, No. 35 a, p. 2753).
The fact that it was made virtually impossible for the arbitrary state persecutors from whom the money was to be protected to gain access is irrelevant here.
2. As extensively explained by attorney Siemund, no company was harmed in the present case by the withdrawal of funds for the temporary protection of part of the donations from arbitrary state access. This is because the company to which the complainants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann temporarily belonged never came into existence due to a lack of registration and therefore never had its own account and thus no assets of its own. For this reason, during the period in question when the loan agreements were concluded, first Dr. Fuellmich, then attorney Tobias Weissenborn, and then Dr. Fuellmich again set up trust accounts to which the donors paid their donations. Dr. Fuellmich and attorney Tobias Weissenborn did not hold the donations in these accounts for a (still) non-existent "Vorschalt-UG," but rather in trust for the donors.
However, if – as proven by the defense – the withdrawal of part of the donation funds by means of transparent loan agreements in order to temporarily protect them from state access was in the interest of the donors, because this ensured that the Corona Committee's investigative work would continue even in the event of account seizure, then this is justified according to established case law. The presumed consent of the donors is also sufficient (see Schönke-Schröder/Perron, loc. cit., para. 48, p. 2763 with further references). According to Schünemann, LPK, Untreue (Breach of Trust), para. 4, the justification of necessity must be assumed here; as does Salinger, in his commentary on the German Criminal Code (StGB) by Wolters Kluwer Online, para. 130, who, however, in the case of express or presumed consent (here: of the donor), even assumes ( ) that this already negates the objective elements of the offense, i.e., the breach of a duty to manage property.
C The written procedure, the refusal of oral hearings from May 3, 2024, the refusal of any discussion, and the "white torture"
I. However, the exchange of the facts of the case on May 3, 2024, and the abrupt termination of the hearing of evidence in order to prevent the newly alleged facts from being refuted in the same way as the original facts had been previously, was not sufficient for the defendant Schindler (and his clients). This was because Schindler and his clients had also noticed that the attempt to prevent the Corona investigation with the help of a fake show trial was being perceived internationally as just that: a show trial initiated by a kidnapping disguised as "deportation" or "extradition," in order to prevent Dr. Fuellmich from continuing his work and, in particular, the legal investigation of the coronavirus pandemic that was already reflected in the Model Grand Jury proceedings. To the obvious surprise of the defendant Schindler and his backers, all seats in the courtroom were occupied from start to finish of the district court proceedings, some of them by international trial observers. Furthermore, the regular public information in German, English, French, Dutch, and other languages provided by Dr. Fuellmich and the trial observers, which the defendant Schindler had expressly permitted in writing to the defendant's attorney Katja Wörmer at the outset of the proceedings (naturally within the framework of equality of arms, since the court and the public prosecutor's office also issued press statements) were and are being taken note of by more and more people all over the world, including and in particular a large number of lawyers.
II. In response to this, the defendants Schindler, Dr. Jakob, and Luther subjected Dr. Fuellmich to more than six months of so-called "white torture" starting on May 3, 2024, with very brief interruptions. The sad climax of this in many respects was that when Dr. Fuellmich, upon being informed by his sister, a nurse, that his mother was dying, asked for a last visit with his mother, this visit was denied, as was his participation in his mother's funeral service/burial at sea.
Supporters of Dr. Fuellmich had registered and obtained permission for a birthday party for Dr. Fuellmich as a demonstration in front of the gates of the Göttingen prison on May 5, 2024. To prevent Dr. Fuellmich from finding out about this, he was allegedly transferred from Ward A2 to Ward A0 immediately after his return from the court hearing on May 3, 2024, because the defendant Schindler had received an anonymous threatening email that either does not exist or was sent by Justus Hoffmann. Ward A0 is the reception ward, from where every new arrival is usually transferred within two to three weeks to one of the "normal wards" in the remand center, namely wards A1 to A3, where all remand prisoners can communicate with each other and also spend their so-called free hour together.
However, all prisoners who are dangerous to themselves or others, or who are threatened and beaten up in the other wards because of sexual offenses, especially pedophilia, are also transferred to Ward A0. But that was not all. Dr. Fuellmich was further isolated on Ward A0, which was already isolated from all other wards and prisoners, and held in his cell, a room measuring approximately eight square meters, so that he would have no contact with other prisoners—with the exception of the so-called "house worker," who is responsible, among other things, for distributing food and, as it soon became apparent, spying on other prisoners for the accused Dr. Jakob and Luther and denouncing other prisoners on their behalf with the help of fabricated charges.
Dr. Fuellmich also had to spend more than six months in isolation during the so-called "free hour," walking alone in the prison courtyard. Every time another inmate spoke to him as he passed by, for example at a cell window, to encourage him or even just to greet him, that other inmate was punished. One inmate in particular, whom Dr. Fuellmich had befriended and who came from an educated, respected, and influential family in Afghanistan, was punished, initially only with solitary confinement, like Dr. Fuellmich, but only for a few days. Finally, however, on the orders of Judge Küttler of the Göttingen Regional Court – who had been found guilty of perversion of justice in the trial against the Afghan citizen, with the result that he will have to pay him damages – with the involvement of the alleged social worker of the Daduna prison, who apparently also works repeatedly for courts and public prosecutors, to the other side of the prison building, facing away from the inner courtyard. However, he was transferred back shortly afterwards. When he tried again to communicate with Dr. Fuellmich, he was isolated once more and then brutally beaten up by about a dozen security officers on the orders of a Mr. Brinkop from the security service and sexually abused on Mr. Brinkop's instructions.
Shortly thereafter, the Afghan prisoner was transferred to Wolfenbüttel Prison on the orders of the defendants Dr. Jakob and Luther. Similarly, another remand prisoner, who had been severely beaten by fellow prisoners threatening him with the knowledge and consent of the alleged social worker Daduna (who is apparently now working in another prison), was transferred there after almost completely losing his sight in one eye. This was because Dr. Fuellmich had provided him with legal advice on his claims for damages against Daduna, the prison administration, and the state of Lower Saxony.
In addition to Dr. Fuellmich's solitary confinement (euphemistically referred to by the prison administration as "separate accommodation"), Dr. Fuellmich was no longer transported to court hearings at the Göttingen Regional Court together with other prisoners. Instead, he was also isolated in this respect, i.e., transported there alone, still accompanied by two security service officers, but these were (and still are, as of mid-April 2025, because this form of transport continues, as does the detention in isolation ward A0) now armed with pistols and submachine guns. In addition, the transports to and from the court were and are accompanied by several, namely up to five police vans, which in turn are manned by equally armed police officers. Like the security officers in the transport vehicle, they are protected by bulletproof vests. During transport (he was, as mentioned, charged with a misdemeanor, not a crime, and there is no evidence of violence on Dr. Fuellmich's part), Dr. Fuellmich was not only handcuffed, which were in turn chained to a belly belt, but he was also shackled during his six months in solitary confinement. And he was and still is informed every time he refuses to wear a bulletproof vest that a bullet, even one fired accidentally by security or the police, could hit and kill him, but that this would then be his – Dr. Fuellmich's – problem. Of course, this is gross nonsense in terms of liability law, but this will be clarified separately in the subsequent international legal proceedings for damages.
III. Despite repeated requests by the defense to explain the reasons for this treatment, neither the defendant Schindler nor the defendants Dr. Jakob and Luther responded. Dozens of criminal complaints remained completely unprocessed, even to this day, in mid-April 2025. Motions by the defense to suspend the proceedings until an expert physician could determine whether Dr. Fuellmich, who was now clearly severely traumatized, was even fit to stand trial, were rejected, as was the motion to have Dr. Fuellmich examined immediately by a specialist.
After five or almost six months, the obstructionist attitude of the defendants Schindler, Dr. Jakob, and Luther could no longer be maintained. They finally informed Dr. Fuellmich on October 30, 2024, via the defendant Luther, attaching so-called "hearing forms" containing ridiculous "reports" allegedly written by fellow prisoners and prison officers ("Dr. Fuellmich talked to Muslim prisoners," "Dr. Fuellmich did not immediately hang up when he was on the phone with attorney Wörmer and was asked by prison officers to end the call," and so on) to suggest that Dr. Fuellmich had provided unauthorized legal advice (which was obviously so false that even the defendant Schindler immediately corrected it) and had otherwise "incited" and "radicalized" his fellow inmates. Lawyer Tobias Pohl commented on this correctly on behalf of the defendants Schindler, Dr. Jakob, and Luther in a letter dated November 13, 2024, as follows:
"None of the conduct of the applicant (meaning Dr. Fuellmich, note by the undersigned) alleged by the respondent (meaning the prison, note by the undersigned) can in any way justify the security measures ordered. (...) It should first be noted that the 'legal advice' alleged by the respondent against the applicant does not violate the Legal Services Act (RDG). (...) The allegations made by prisoners 332/24/2 and 326/24/1 that the applicant had made affidavits and submitted them for signature in order to send them to his lawyer for reproduction are untrue. It is striking that none of these alleged affidavits can be produced. The penultimate paragraph on page 13 of the annexes to the statement of October 30, 2024, states:
"The prisoner, book no. 326/24/1, apparently wanted to have his initial affidavit returned to him by the prisoner Fuellmich, along with a complaint about the inaction of the social worker UH, as he no longer held this opinion. The prison guard Fuellmich then replied: "I don't think that's a good idea, but I can't give it back to you until tomorrow anyway. It's on its way and won't be back until tomorrow."
No mention is made of what ultimately happened to the affidavit. It is to be expected that prisoner 326/24/1 did in fact get his affidavit back. Why then is it not submitted as an attachment?
The fact is that no such affidavits prepared or drawn up by the applicant existed. The claims to this effect made by prisoners 332/24/2 and 326/24/1 are false.
Rather, the applicant was actively approached by other prisoners and then helped them, as prisoner 329/24/8 stated:
"(...) That's why I asked him."
In its statement of October 30, 2024, the respondent loses itself in heretical generalizations about the applicant's "radicalization."
Statements made by the applicant that are covered by the fundamental right to freedom of expression, if indeed they were made by him at all, are presented as an attempt to manipulate fellow prisoners."
"His level of fame and the media presence of his supporters" are held against the applicant and cited as justification for the security measures.
The blanket assertion of "widespread untruths and misinformation about prison procedures" and the "considerable negative influence" on fellow prisoners remain unsupported by specific examples.
The respondent does not provide any evidence of how the applicant is alleged to have manipulated or incited others.
Nor does the respondent provide any specific information on how many and which prisoners complained to the prison staff "about the applicant's behavior."
The "risk of violence against persons" perceived by the respondent is not explained at all.
The security measures imposed on the applicant are unlawful and violate the applicant's rights.
Not a single instance of behavior can be substantiated by the respondent's statement of October 30, 2024, which would have disrupted the security and order of the institution even to a minor extent.
Furthermore, the respondent does not comment on the requirement of paragraph ... (meaning a justification of the "security measures," note by the undersigned). It merely states that the security order was "reviewed and last extended on October 7, 2024." However, it does not indicate how and by whom this was done and why this was not disclosed to the applicant.
Ultimately, there are no apparent grounds for justifying the security measure ordered, which is why a decision in accordance with the application is requested."
At least all torture measures were then lifted without further ado, although Dr. Fuellmich remained in Ward A0, isolated from all other prisoners on remand, and continues to be accompanied (albeit without shackles) by heavily armed prison officers and police when he is taken to and from court.
Worse still, completely unsubstantiated allegations that Dr. Fuellmich was "inciting" and "radicalizing" fellow prisoners and, with the help of his supporters, was allegedly blowing a hole in the prison wall were not only false. They were invented and put on paper by the defendants Schindler, Dr. Jakob, and Luther with the help of prison officer Laufer, who was carrying out their orders, and then – apparently – confirmed by a special fellow inmate. This was the so-called "domestic worker" mentioned above, Wilson Reichardt, who had been charged with two counts of rape and, for this reason and because the other inmates had recognized him as a "traitor" working for the prison administration, had been repeatedly beaten up in the normal ward. As a result, he became a house worker in ward A0, where, as noted above, he acted as a "spy" for the defendants Dr. Jakob and Luther.
The defense succeeded in unblacking the names in the hearing forms handed over by the accused Luther with her statement of October 30, 2024 (commented on by attorney Tobias Weissenborn, as quoted above) and in clearing all the names of the prison officers involved (who, as a rule, worked with completely harmless or ridiculous comments, see above) prison officers involved, but also of the – allegedly – involved fellow prisoners. It became apparent that the driving force behind this was apparently Wilson Reichardt himself. Dr. Fuellmich then confronted Wilson Reichardt. He immediately admitted that he had invented everything on behalf of the prison management and (as he himself can hardly write) had even signed prepared statements provided by prison officer Laufer. He then initially agreed to make a sworn statement to this effect, which Dr. Fuellmich drafted with him within two days. The statement, which Wilson Reichardt also believes accurately reflects the facts, reads as follows:yyy
"I hereby declare, being aware of the criminal liability of making a false statement under oath, the following:
1. Since around June 2024, I have been repeatedly asked by senior prison officials to report as much negative information as possible about my fellow inmate Dr. Reiner Fuellmich. I have also seen that this has apparently been attempted with other fellow inmates, i.e., to persuade them to report as much negative information as possible about Dr. Fuellmich.
2. In my case, I was first asked to confirm a statement that had already been prepared and written by a prison officer. This statement referred to alleged statements made by others, so I could only declare that it was probably correct if the others had said so. The signature on the left-hand side of the statement is not mine.
3. About two or three weeks ago, I had a court appointment at the Göttingen Regional Court. After the hearing, I was approached by a judge named Küppler and a prosecutor whose name I do not remember, as well as a supposed lawyer, a fellow prisoner who has since been transferred, named Rody Fattah, who asked me if I could say anything negative about the advice given to Rody Fattah by Dr. Fuellmich. I explained that I could not comment on this. I was accompanied by my lawyers.
Göttingen, November 28, 2024
Wilson Reichardt"
However, when Dr. Fuellmich asked Wilson Reichardt to sign the affidavit he had drafted together with Wilson Reichardt, Wilson Reichardt stated that he had discussed this with his lawyers in Hanover. This struck Dr. Fuellmich as strange, since Wilson Reichardt, who was from Munich, had previously stated that his lawyers were based in Munich. These lawyers in Hanover had told him that it would be better to make this statement in court as part of a witness testimony. Becoming suspicious, Dr. Fuellmich asked Wilson Reichardt for his lawyers' phone number so that attorney Wörmer could discuss this with them. However, Ms. Wörmer was unable to reach the lawyers named by Wilson Reichardt at the Hanover telephone number provided, as she explained to Dr. Fuellmich on the phone in late November/early December 2024. Dr. Fuellmich immediately confronted Wilson Reichardt with this information. One day later, he was transferred to another prison, allegedly to Lübeck, now obviously exposed.
IV. Despite everything, the defense finally succeeded in having Dr. Fuellmich examined by a specialist of his choice who was also experienced in psychiatry, albeit only within the prison. However, this was preceded by several completely fruitless appointments, for which, according to some inmates, the head of the medical service, a man named Frank, who is himself a severe addict, was responsible. Due to serious medical errors he has committed over the past 15 years, he has caused severe injuries to prisoners in pretrial detention. At least two other prison doctors are willing to testify against him. The names are known to the defense. During the first attempt to make a medical diagnosis for Dr. Fuellmich, which took place in the prison itself, the accused Frank appeared completely uninterested, even absent-minded. Dr. Fuellmich had the same experience with the completely disinterested prison psychiatrist and then with a female doctor named Goost, against whom criminal charges have now also been filed for failure to render assistance. All three did not even listen to Dr. Fuellmich and simply stated that it was normal for pretrial detention to be perceived as stressful. All three completely ignored the fact that this was not normal pretrial detention, as Dr. Fuellmich had explained.
Particularly revealing was the appointment requested on grounds of illness to determine the defendant Frank's fitness to stand trial. This did not take place in the prison's medical department, but in his private practice. He had Dr. Fuellmich brought in by security guards, accompanied by heavily armed police officers in squad cars, with handcuffs chained to his waist belt and leg irons, while the police officers and security guards kept their weapons at the ready. The anamnesis and diagnosis interview then took place in a treatment room belonging to the accused Frank in the presence of security guards who continued to hold their weapons at the ready. The accused Frank tried to hide his trembling hands between his knees. However, what Dr. Fuellmich thought was fear was probably a sign of his addiction, as was later explained to him (Dr. Fuellmich) by fellow prisoners whose names are known to the defense.
V. At least Dr. Fuellmich was finally examined by the physician Dr. Külken. On December 15, 2024, he issued the following "medical opinion" on Dr. Fuellmich's state of health:
"On December 14, 2024, I visited Dr. Fuellmich at his request at the Rosdorf prison. I conducted a one-hour interview with him to clarify the presence and, if applicable, the severity of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and, if necessary, to assess Dr. Fuellmich's current ability to continue his imprisonment and the court proceedings.
In advance, I had requested the prison by telephone to allow me to conduct this medical interview without the presence of an official, in accordance with my written visitation permit. This right was denied without explanation as 'unusual'. I was also denied permission to bring questionnaires and writing materials for documentation purposes. As a result, the interview could not be conducted in the standard manner and I was only able to make a memorandum from memory.
The results of the examination are alarming. Not only are essential psychological and somatic characteristics of PTSD (in the context of type 2 trauma) more than sufficient, but the continued retraumatization through special measures taken by the prison, in particular since May 2024, to isolate me from fellow inmates with whom I have mutual contact, weighs even more heavily. Even more serious is the continued retraumatization through special measures taken by the prison, particularly since May 2024, to isolate him from fellow inmates with a ban on contact between them and apparently brutal sanctions for violations of the ban, as well as – during transports between the prison and the court – the hand and foot restraints, which are experienced as extremely humiliating, and the regular comments by officials that he could be hit by a stray bullet while in transit.
Assessment of fitness for detention and trial: In my opinion, Dr. Fuellmich's behavior in prison and in court, which still appears to be largely adapted, is less and less attributable to his (primarily above-average) resilience and more and more to PTSD-typical avoidance strategies, behind which lies considerable and growing psychological distress. This avoidance behavior requires an extraordinary amount of energy, which now appears to be exhausted. If detention and court proceedings continue, a psychological (and possibly also somatic) decompensation of existential proportions is to be expected in the near future.
To avert imminent danger, an immediate and unimpeded examination and assessment by a specialist physician and appropriate consequences are indicated. (...)"
However, the accused Schindler, Dr. Jakob, Luther, and Frank were not in the least bit interested in this medical opinion from a specialist, which made at least one proper external expert opinion absolutely necessary. The accused Schindler continues to refuse to suspend the proceedings until Dr. Fuellmich's fitness to stand trial and participate in the proceedings has been conclusively established. Instead, the defendant Schindler continued the criminal proceedings against Dr. Fuellmich with the utmost vigor, which, since May 3, 2024, at the latest, no longer deserved to be called an "oral hearing." From that day on, he not only rejected all motions by the defense or the defendant, but also refused any communication with the defense, in particular with the defendant. He did not answer a single question from the defendant, not even when the latter simply asked for clarification, for example, about the reasons for the "white torture" measures described above. He also refused to engage in "communication" or the "legal discussion" requested by the defense, as did the defendants Recha and John.
But even this was not enough to satisfy the increasingly obvious desire of the trial observers to simply silence the defendant and the defense in order to prevent the international public in particular from finding out what was going on here in the Göttingen court to suppress the investigation into the Corona pandemic. Shortly after May 3, 2024, the defendant Schindler therefore ordered that the proceedings be conducted in writing in the form of a so-called "self-reading procedure" in accordance with Section 257a of the German Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO). As intended by the defendant Schindler, this led to a grossly unlawful and unconstitutional exclusion of the public and a violation of the principle of oral proceedings. And it led to an enormous delay in the proceedings. This is because every time a motion was filed by the defense, it had to be done in writing. This was not only unreasonable for Dr. Fuellmich, who had been in pre-trial detention for almost 19 months and was severely restricted in his ability to defend himself—he has no access to his files, his computer, or the internet—but it also meant that the public present was unable to follow the proceedings. Since the motions were no longer read out, the defendant Schindler took them with him to the chamber's meeting room, had Dr. Fuellmich handcuffed and transferred to a basement cell each time, and then (presumably) rejected the motion with the same text modules after reading it.
Particularly strange is the complete indifference with which both the defendant Schindler and the defendants Recha and John reacted when Dr. Fuellmich twice offered to help them solve a murder committed 20 years ago by three people. Dr. Fuellmich has information – via fellow prisoners and their lawyers – about which murder and which murderers are involved. Dr. Fuellmich offered this information, which would not only lead to the clarification of that murder but also to the prevention of further similar crimes—and, if necessary, to the clarification of other crimes already committed by the three individuals—in exchange for a legal discussion in which a so-called "deal" would have been negotiated.
In Anglo-American law, at least, it is self-evident that the offer of reliable, immediately verifiable information about such capital crimes and the perpetrators responsible should lead to at least a legal discussion or some form of communication in exchange for immunity from prosecution or a reduced sentence for an alleged offense. Despite repeated attempts to contact them, the accused Schindler, Recha, and John responded with complete emotional indifference.
VI. However, when all this had not yet brought the quick verdict that had been repeatedly demanded since May 3, 2024—with the accused Schindler hypocritically invoking the urgency of the proceedings because it was a matter of detention—within reach (the defendant John had made a three-minute plea shortly after May 3, 2024, demanding a prison sentence of three years and nine months), the defendants Schindler and John, who were working closely with the complainants, as well as Recha, resorted to even more drastic measures:
The complainants, Justus Hoffmann and Antonia Fischer, had launched a large-scale smear campaign against Dr. Fuellmich, the members of the defense team, journalists, and other supporters on the internet under a series of false identities (including "Dominatrix"). The authors were Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann; Antonia Fischer, who had already worked for the state security service during her legal clerkship, was also an administrator. Attorney Siemund presented to the court in detail the sexually perverse and sadomasochistic memes and comments used by the complainants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, which said everything about Antonia Fischer's and Justus Hoffmann's problems. Apart from that, Justus Hoffmann and Antonia Fischer called for a "tsunami of complaints" against the members of the defense and filed a large number of such complaints themselves. The accused John was then immediately prepared to initiate criminal investigations against the members of the defense and the defendant on the basis of these complaints. The defendant Schindler later referred to this in the oral announcement of his decision on April 24, 2025, at 5 p.m., announcing that further charges would be brought against the defense and the defendant because of their statements in the course of their defense.
However, the trial observers and the defendant Dr. Fuellmich continued to inform the international public about the highly scandalous and criminal behavior of the defendants John, Recha, and Schindler, which clearly exceeded all constitutional limits, so that the complainants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann felt compelled to now openly call for the murder of the defendants, still hiding behind fake identities. Recha, and Schindler, which apparently prompted the complainants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann—still hiding behind fake identities—to openly call for the murder of the defense and the defendant. They even succeeded in sending two would-be assassins to the courtroom for this purpose, one of whom had previously stated in a post that he wanted to see Dr. Fuellmich dead in the courtroom in his own blood. Justus Hoffmann contributed a fitting image showing Dr. Fuellmich lying in a pool of blood in the courtroom. The defendants Schindler and Recha merely took note of this, apparently amused.
When the defense and Dr. Fuellmich pointed this out to the court and the defendant Recha on March 21, 2025, and identified the two would-be assassins in the courtroom and asked attorney Wörmer for protection, Recha did not react at all or only with ostentatious disinterest. And the defendant Schindler succinctly pointed out to the defense and the defendant that they could file a criminal complaint with the police at some point later. In any case, he said, none of this concerned him. Attorney Wörmer should now finally continue with her closing argument.
Lawyer Wörmer, who was now barely able to carry out her defense work, requested a break in the proceedings to compose herself and went into the courtyard of the court while Dr. Fuellmich was once again led away in handcuffs to the cell in the basement. There, the would-be assassin, who had been expressly identified to the court by Dr. Fuellmich and lawyer Wörmer, approached lawyer Wörmer in a threatening manner. It was only thanks to the intervention of court officials that a physical attack could be prevented. Following Ms. Wörmer's physical collapse, it was again only thanks to a female court official that Ms. Wörmer was taken by ambulance to the hospital and given medical attention.
The defendants Schindler and Recha were not in the least interested in any of this; they simply waited impassively to see whether the attacks from which lawyer Wörmer and the defendant Dr. Fuellmich had asked them for protection would take place and whether they would be successful. At the next scheduled hearing, the defendant Schindler then informed lawyer Wörmer that he would now limit her closing statement by imposing a time limit. The defendant Schindler rejected the motion for recusal that was then filed, as usual.
When Dr. Fuellmich then continued with his "final statement" (i.e., the presentation and explanation of this criminal complaint), he also limited Dr. Fuellmich's speaking time and finally forced him to stop when he realized that a large part of the "final statement" had been incorporated into this criminal complaint, which was directed in particular against him, the defendant Schindler.
D Legal situation regarding the criminal offenses committed by the defendants, in particular regarding perversion of justice
Finally, due to the principle of jura novit curia, this criminal complaint is limited to a few comments on the alleged criminal offenses, in particular the perversion of justice, the denial of the right to a fair hearing, the ordering of written proceedings in the form of a self-reading procedure, and the abduction of Dr. Fuellmich from Mexico disguised as deportation and extradition.
I. First, a few words on the denial of the right to a fair hearing prior to the abduction and detention of Dr. Fuellmich on October 11, 2023. In this regard, it should be noted that the criminal complaint was filed on September 2, 2022, and according to the report by investigator Spörhase dated January 31, 2023 (page 135, main file volume 1), at least the complainants, who apparently also seemed strange to him, and the witness Viviane Fischer should have been heard as witnesses. However, this did not happen.
At the very least, Dr. Fuellmich himself, as the accused, should have been summoned as a witness "at the latest before the conclusion of the investigation" in accordance with Section 163a of the German Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO).
"at the latest before the conclusion of the investigation."
.
Instead, the accused John not only failed to do so, but actively prevented it by refusing to provide any information, and in particular access to the files, to specific inquiries from attorney Cathrin Behn and Tobias Weissenborn after employees of Dr. Fuellmich's law firm had become suspicious due to strange inquiries at Dr. Fuellmich's office. This was done on the grounds that they were also under investigation as defendants. This later turned out to be a mere protective claim. For these alleged investigations (there is no trace of any investigations in any of the files) had to be dropped without further ado – but of course only after Dr. Fuellmich had been kidnapped and imprisoned.
When Munich lawyer Dagmar Schön then requested information and access to the files, the accused John also refused her, pointing out that there was still a great deal to investigate and that this was the most difficult of the 60 criminal cases he had allegedly taken on in Göttingen. This also proved to be a protective claim, because the accused John had not conducted any investigations whatsoever in the case of Dr. Fuellmich – as usual – but had merely arranged on November 4, 2022, for the account analysis already carried out in accordance with the analysis report of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security/Schmelter to be carried out again.
This not only prevented the accused Dr. Fuellmich from filing "motions to admit evidence" pursuant to Section 163 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which would have immediately exonerated him. This is because, at the time the indictment was drawn up on November 17, 2023, there was only an arrest warrant dated March 15, 2023, which was flawed in every respect (see above). Therefore, even from a temporal perspective, there would have been more than sufficient opportunity to hear Dr. Fuellmich as the accused between the receipt of the criminal complaint on September 2, 2022, and the issuance of the arrest warrant on March 15, 2023. In any case, a hearing of Dr. Fuellmich would have revealed that all three premises of the criminal complaint, which was based on false allegations in every respect, and, accordingly, the arrest warrant based solely on this criminal complaint were false:
1. The first €200,000 was not "simply" embezzled or misappropriated, but represented the payment of a completely legal loan agreement.
2. Both loans (one for 200,000 euros and one for 500,000 euros) were not objectionable under company law because
a) there was a genuine risk to the donations in the donation account,
b) Dr. Fuellmich was at all times willing and able to repay the loan in the event of a liquidity crisis, which never occurred.
c) the substitute shareholders Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, who filed the complaint, were completely inactive and only interested in the donation money, and did not play any role in the work of the Corona Committee or in terms of company law (they were exclusively interested in the donation money),
d) all managing directors, including Dr. Fuellmich, had sole power of management.
In any case, the accused John—obviously in execution of the order given to him—hastily brought charges without granting the accused Dr. Fuellmich a legal hearing. This was done in violation of § 163 a (1) StPO (German Code of Criminal Procedure), as promising defense options (see above) were deliberately prevented.
II. The abduction, which was either disguised as "deportation" (according to the accused Schindler, against his better judgment) or "extradition" (as stated in the arrest report of October 13, 2023, at Frankfurt Airport), is a crime under international law (see, among many others, Schünemann, "Eine Würdigung zum 70. Geburtstag von Paul Günter Pötz" [An appraisal on the 70th birthday of Paul Günter Pötz], in: 140 Jahre Goltdammer's Archiv für Strafrecht [140 years of Goltdammer's Archive for Criminal Law], editor Jürgen Wolter, 1939, p. 226 ff.), committed here by the accused John, Roggatz, and Knobloch, who has not yet been charged. This crime against international law ( ) obliges the abducting state, in this case Germany, to return the abducted person at the request of the injured state (in this case Mexico) (Schünemann, op. cit., p. 229 with further references).
However, if the injured state, in this case Mexico, does not exercise its right to return the abducted person, for example for political reasons (Mexico had been pressured by the German Embassy in Mexico, as Dr. Fuellmich had been informed by the head of the migration authority and the honorary consul in Tijuana), then, according to Schünemann,
"an effective means of removing this stain on the tableau of international mutual legal assistance is to grant the abducted person his own claims for restitution, which must be aimed at his release, if not the final discontinuation of the criminal proceedings due to an obstacle to the proceedings" (Schünemann, op. cit., p. 229).
The
"violation of the legal sphere of the persecuted person protected by the principle of the rule of law due to disregard of the provisions and formalities existing in extradition law for his protection" (in this case, in particular, the requirement to submit an extradition request to the Higher Regional Court of Braunschweig and to grant Dr. Fuellmich a legal hearing in subsequent extradition proceedings and not to refuse him this right, note by the undersigned) can neither be justified nor remedied." (cf. Schünemann, loc. cit., p. 233).
Because:
"The disregard of the norms of extradition law protecting the individual constitutes an obstacle to proceedings even in the domestic prosecution of an extradited person, according to the unanimous case law and doctrine that has existed for many years" (cf. Schünemann, loc. cit., p. 233, with numerous further references from the highest court case law and literature in footnote 74),
or:
"The forfeiture of the right to prosecution, a parallel to the exclusion of evidence, the right to have the consequences of an act removed and the guarantee of personal freedom in Article 5(1) of the MRK" (Schünemann, loc. cit., with reference to the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in 1986, p. 2 ff.).
"It goes without saying that imprisonment initiated by abduction constitutes a deprivation of liberty that violates the fundamental right under Article 2(2) sentence 2 of the Basic Law, in addition to which there is a simultaneous violation of Article 5(1)(c) of the MRK, which also permits only lawful arrest and not abduction in criminal cases (see ECtHR in the Bozano case, NJW 1987, 366 f.), is no longer decisive." (Schünemann, loc. cit., p. 237).
"In the present case, where the persecuting state (in this case Germany) did not obtain custody of the persecuted person through the prescribed extradition procedure but through deliberate criminal machinations, the construction apparently envisaged by the Federal Constitutional Court, whereby the deprivation of liberty becomes lawful retrospectively upon the issuance of the arrest warrant in Germany, is also out of the question." (Schünemann, loc. cit., p. 237).
III. The order by the accused Schindler for the written procedure referred to in Section 257a of the Code of Criminal Procedure as a "self-reading procedure," with the consequences described here for Dr. Fuellmich, whose defense has already been severely impaired by the completely disproportionate pretrial detention, constitutes—not only when viewed as a whole – a particularly gross violation of both the principle of oral proceedings and the principle of public proceedings. At the time, it was not apparent that the right of application would be abused by the parties involved (in this case, the defense); the defense merely insisted on its right to a fair hearing on the new allegations that had suddenly arisen since May 3, 2024 (see in this regard the Karlsruhe Commentary on the Code of Criminal Procedure, Diemer, margin note 5 on Section 257a StPO, 9th edition, 2023). Above all, however, it did not serve to "clarify the facts of the case as accurately and quickly as possible," but rather the opposite (see Karlsruhe Commentary, ibid.).
The order was also not considered because it was unreasonable for the parties to the proceedings, in particular Dr. Fuellmich, for the reasons already outlined above (see again the Karlsruhe Commentary, ibid.).
IV. The defendant Schindler repeatedly asserted, contrary to his better knowledge, that it was not necessary to hear the witnesses Antonia Fischer, Justus Hoffmann, Marcel Templin, and Viviane Fischer because their credibility was not even relevant. In his oral statement of April 24, 2025, the defendant Schindler explicitly referred to the credibility of the complainants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann. However, their credibility had long since been destroyed, among other things because
– their criminal complaint contained exclusively false information (see above)
– and they had used false identities on the internet to spread defamatory statements and calls for murder against the defense, the defendant Dr. Fuellmich, and others, and
– she had stolen well over €1 million from Dr. Fuellmich by means of fraud and extortion and approximately €400,000 in client funds.
Nevertheless, the defendant Schindler "believed" – or at least pretended to believe – their false claims that that they had not learned from Dr. Fuellmich in November 2020 that Viviane Fischer and he would enter into loan agreements because of the threats to the donation account and that Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer were considering purchasing gold for the Corona Committee on the advice of Jens Kuhn.
And, of course, the assumption made by the defendant Schindler that there was a complex agreement between Dr. Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer (as explained above: loan agreement, sham transaction, trust agreement, liquidity reserve) depends in any case on the credibility of the witness Viviane Fischer.
The defendant Schindler himself even stated this to the Higher Regional Court of Braunschweig when he submitted a summary of the evidence presented in the main hearing up to February 27, 2024, stating under point 3:
"Either the defendant and Ms. Viviane Fischer mutually approved the use of the loan amounts for private purposes, or they had agreed to keep the funds as a liquidity reserve (no mention of a sham transaction agreement or trust agreement, note by the signatory), which neither of them had ever adhered to independently of each other. Regardless of which of the two versions of events ultimately applied (the relevant questioning of the witness Viviane Fischer has not yet taken place), the Chamber considers that there was a breach of trust, either as a result of collusion with Ms. Viviane Fischer or through a breach of an agreement concluded with Viviane Fischer (...)" (emphasis added by the signatory)
Why should the questioning of Viviane Fischer about allegedly concluded contracts be "significant," but her credibility not matter? It would be difficult to come up with more legal nonsense.
V. In and of itself, the mere exchange of the facts alleged as breach of trust in the context of a "legal notice" on May 3, 2024, in combination with the simultaneous denial of the right to a fair hearing for the defense and, in particular, the refusal to hear any witnesses for the defense to refute this fabrication, constitutes a particularly egregious case of perversion of justice pursuant to Section 339 of the German Criminal Code (StGB).
However, when all the circumstances summarized here are considered as a whole, there can be no reasonable doubt that the elements of § 339 StGB are fulfilled, because the accused Schindler, by
– exchange of the facts of the indictment in combination with the denial of a fair hearing and, in addition,
– the representation, contrary to better knowledge, of Dr. Fuellmich's abduction from Mexico as "deportation,"
– the ordering of the written "self-reading procedure" pursuant to Section 257a StPO,
– the subjection of Dr. Fuellmich to more than six months of so-called "white torture,"
– the refusal to suspend the proceedings after the severe traumatization of Dr. Fuellmich was established by the expert Dr. Külken in order to determine whether Dr. Fuellmich was still fit to stand trial and participate in the proceedings,
– the rejection of all motions to introduce evidence and also (almost) all other motions by the defense,
– the refusal to provide assistance to the defense members and the defendants who were defamed and threatened with death by the complainants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann, etc.
in a "serious manner" and "deliberately" deviated from the law and justice.
Similarly, the defendants John and Recha are guilty of perversion of justice, among other things through John's decisions in the criminal investigation (refusal to conduct any investigation, in particular refusal to question the complainants, Viviane Fischer and hearing Dr. Fuellmich as a defendant), but also through their collusion with the court to bring about decisions that pervert the course of justice (cf. Beck, OK, StGB, von Heintschel-Heinegg/Kudlich, 60th edition, as of January 1, 2024, § 339, margin note 7.1).
The defendant John and, if applicable, the defendant Recha, who was also involved at the time, also fulfilled the elements of perversion of justice by bringing charges with deliberately inaccurate facts (see Beck, OK, loc. cit., para. 14.1).
In fact, when viewed as a whole, the conduct of the accused Schindler, John, and Recha constitutes an attack on the fundamental principles of law and the legal system as a whole (see Beck, OK, loc. cit., margin note 12).
In any case, the breach of law of which they are accused is, in its nature, a fundamental violation of the administration of justice, in which these public officials deliberately and seriously departed from the law (see again Beck, OK, loc. cit., para. 12).
E Finally, on the susceptibility to abuse of Section 266 of the German Criminal Code (StGB), which was ignored by the defendants Schindler and John
Section 266 of the German Criminal Code, in the form applied here against Dr. Fuellmich, was significantly influenced in the Third Reich by the president of the notorious People's Court, Freisler, who had the resistance fighters of July 20, 1944, tortured and executed. He wanted disloyalty to be understood as a "catch-all" paragraph for the persecution of political opponents (see, for example, Salger, Untreue, in: Wolters Kluwer Online, para. 2 with further references). Today, as described in the essay by Prof. Kubiciel, which, ironically, was referred to by the defendant John, this paragraph is particularly susceptible to abuse (Kubiciel, "Gesellschaftsrechtliche Pflichtwidrigkeit und Untreuestrafbarkeit" [Breach of duty under company law and criminal liability for breach of trust], 2005 in NStZ, p. 353 ff.). He writes regarding the unconstitutionally vague wording of Section 266 of the German Criminal Code (StGB) that
"despite the efforts of academia and practitioners, the contours of the offense of breach of trust are unclear, and not only in borderline cases: in many cases of practical relevance, those subject to the law and those applying it are not provided with clear instructions on how to act and interpret the law."
However, this is most evident in the area of corporate law disputes:
"This deficiency is particularly acute in business decisions (in this case, the loan agreement, note by the signatory), which are examined on the basis of (often vague) company law requirements and from which a breach of company law obligations (which, as explained above, does not even exist in this case, note by the signatory) is used to derive allegations of breach of trust."
Kubiciel then goes into detail about the special features of corporate law disputes and writes at the bottom of page 355 of his essay, as if he had already been aware of this case before the Göttingen Regional Court:
"The difficulties resulting from such an influence of company law are obvious: criminal law risks for entrepreneurial activity are hardly assessable, not only in the much-discussed cases of risk decisions."
And then he writes:
"Decision-makers run the risk that Section 266 will become a field of strategic or personal disputes, since public prosecutors can easily initiate investigations by referring to the broad scope of the offense of breach of trust (...)".
This is precisely the case here, although, as explained, there is not even the slightest indication of a breach of duty. As explained and proven on several occasions, the strategic dispute conducted here is being waged by the accused John and Schindler on behalf of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution/State Security, which is hiding behind them, without any hint of conduct contrary to company law or civil law.state security services hiding behind them, in order to remove Dr. Fuellmich from circulation because of his completely legitimate Corona information work and, above all, the related legal investigation demanded, among others, by former Constitutional Court President Papier.
The personal conflict mentioned by Kubiciel is in fact being conducted by the V-men of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution themselves, led by Justus Hoffmann, because he, the unsuccessful, psychologically disturbed social outsider with no friends or family, simply envies Dr. Fuellmich for everything he has. In reality, he is simply projecting his self-hatred onto Dr. Fuellmich and is in the process of destroying himself in real time for the whole world to see.
Footnote 41 cited by Kubiciel is also significant for the above statement (that Section 266 of the German Criminal Code has become a field of strategic and personal conflict). It states:
"It is characteristic of the 'flexibility' of breach of trust that criminal investigations are widely used as a vehicle for determining civil law claims for damages."
Kubiciel then refers to articles published by Mestmäcker and Lampe, who, like Kubiciel, warn against the misuse of Section 266 to subject claims that are not enforceable under civil law to criminal liability and then to base civil law claims on this.
This is undoubtedly what is happening here, as demonstrated by the entire course of action taken by the complainants, in particular the "settlement" submitted by complainants Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffmann to attorney Wörmer in early January 2024. In this settlement, they demand the entire donation assets, all the gold, and, in addition, claims for damages, claims that they could never even begin to enforce under civil law and, in particular, under company law. And this is precisely why they have now filed a civil lawsuit against Dr. Fuellmich, apparently to avoid the imminent statute of limitations on their non-existent claims, and at the same time (turning the principle of the primacy of civil law and criminal law as a last resort on its head) in the proceedings pending before the Göttingen Regional Court (presumably financed with the money stolen from Dr. Fuellmich) they immediately requested that the civil proceedings be suspended until the criminal proceedings have been concluded.
Due to their extremely close cooperation with the defendants John and Schindler, they are confident that Dr. Fuellmich will be convicted, on which they can then rely for the civil dispute in the hope that they will not be dealing with exceptionally law-abiding lawyers such as Senior Public Prosecutor Reinecke, but with corruptible or blackmailable lawyers.
In short, the present case of criminal proceedings against Dr. Fuellmich is not only a case of the most serious perversion of justice, but also a case of the most obvious abuse of the breach of trust clause to enforce civil law claims that cannot be enforced and to provide a sham solution to the personal problems of the complainants, who have failed and discredited themselves in every respect.
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich
Attorney at Law
Send your letter and/or postcard directly to Reiner in Germany:
JVA Bremervoerde
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich
Am Steinberg 75
D - 27432 Bremervoerde
Germany
PLEASE NOTE: Only letters and postcards are allowed to be sent to this address. Nothing else can be included in the post to the address in Germany. (No money and/or stamps can be included in your letter to Reiner.)
Inka, Reiner’s wife, is not living in the United States, and it has been determined that it is not secure for supporters to send anything directly to her.
If you would like to communicate directly with Inka Fuellmich and send support for Reiner’s freedom, please send your letter and/or donation to the following address:
Inka Fuellmich
c/o Daisy Papp Mindset Evolution Foundation
13300 S Cleveland Ave
Suite 56
Fort Myers, FL 33907 USA
Please be sure to include “Suite 56” in the address to ensure delivery. Your letter will be forwarded to Inka Fuellmich.
The Fuellmich couple appreciates you consider donating and helping for Reiner's freedom.
Thank you
Thank you
Thank you
Crypto:
ICIC's GiveSendGo: https://www.givesendgo.com/GBBX2
The Fuellmich couple appreciates you consider donating and helping for Reiner's freedom.
Subscribe to Reiner’s new YouTube Channel here: https://www.youtube.com/@ReinerFuellmichNewsNetwork
Throughout the West, the illegitimate governments are persecuting people like Julian Assange, Tamara Lich, Chris Barber (in Canada) and Rainer Fuellmich and the lawyer in the Bill Gates case.
The entire justice system has been seized by criminals.
The people are watching!
Thank you and keep on keepin on! Loving you are staying humorous throughout.